Exploring the Racial-Justice Curriculum Development

SPARKING COURAGEOUS CONVERSATIONS:

EXPLORING THE RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESSES OF TEACHERS FOR

PREDOMINANTLY WHITE MIDDLE-SCHOOL STUDENTS

Sonja Cherry-Paul

Dissertation Committee:

Professor Lucy Calkins, Sponsor Professor Lalitha Vasudevan

Approved by the Committee on the Degree of Doctor of Education

Date 22 May 2019

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Teachers College, Columbia University

2019 ABSTRACT

SPARKING COURAGEOUS CONVERSATIONS:

EXPLORING THE RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESSES OF TEACHERS FOR

PREDOMINANTLY WHITE MIDDLE-SCHOOL STUDENTS

Sonja Cherry-Paul

Drawing on practitioner-research and case study methods, including interview protocols, this study aimed to explore the insights and experiences, as described by four teachers, of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum for predominantly White

6th, 7th, and 8th graders in their course: Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing

Race and Racism. This study was framed in critical literacy theories that are grounded in the work of Freire (2000) but draw on the work of contemporary critical scholars and practitioners with the knowledge that critical literacy pedagogy can provide a powerful means for interrogating how larger structures, texts, individuals, and groups are constructed.

Data collection took place in four phases across three months. Primary data sources included analysis of: curriculum and emerging curricular artifacts, in-depth interviews, surveys, teacher journals, researcher journal, and memos.

The findings of this study emerged from the curriculum development that occurred the summer prior to the 2017-2018 academic school year as well as the teaching that occurred that year. The reflections of each of the teachers about their development and teaching of the racial-justice curriculum demonstrated the breakthroughs and boundaries of teaching about race and racism with predominantly White middle-school students. Further, their reflections illustrated the ongoing, internal work required to facilitate conversations about race with students more effectively. Such work included monitoring for how race affected their lives as well as the lives of others, and how race as one of their identities affected the ways in which they developed and taught curriculum.

Finally, the teachers discovered that facilitating courses on race required moving from a content-based approach to a consciousness-based approach where they each, alongside of their students, assumed a researching-the-world stance to learn about race and confront and challenge racism.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thank you is the best prayer anyone could say. I say that one a lot. Thank you expresses extreme gratitude, humility and understanding.

– Alice Walker

The journey of this dissertation has been filled with remarkable, inspiring individuals who were constant beams of light along the way. I will be forever grateful to all of the people whose wisdom, grace, and generosity have left an indelible imprint upon me and this work.

I am eternally grateful to be grounded by the love and support of my family and friends. Frank, you are the sun, my compass. If I am strong, it is because of the restorative power of your love. Imani, you are the light. The whole world brightens at the sound of your voice. I could not have accomplished this work without both of your support. To my parents, Edward and Mary, who have sacrificed so much on my behalf, I hope that I’ve made you proud. I am blessed to have a wonderful brother, Eddie, my very first friend, who always looks out for me even now. Jason, Nikki, Ella, and Nina, thank you for reminding me to surface for air and for the energy and love you envelop me in.

I am deeply grateful to Lucy Calkins, my sponsor. You have been a steady beam of light. More than once, and in various contexts, you’ve helped me to find my way. I so appreciate your support and encouragement, and the big push you’ve given me all throughout this journey. It is my great fortune to learn from and alongside you. Lalitha

Vasudevan, my second reader, thank you for being a profound listener. You always manage to hear what I sometimes struggle to say. Your keen eyes, ears, and encouraging words make me feel like I can conquer anything. Tom Hatch, thank you for being my

iii third reader and advisor for all these years. Your steadiness and insight have brought me far. Lucy, Lalitha, and Tom, you are my mentors, and I admire you and your work more than I can express.

Thank you to my brilliant friends and study partners, Tara Lencl, Dana Johansen, and Dr. Joanne Marciano-Watson.

I am incredibly moved by and grateful for the teachers of this study: Erin, Jamie, and Reid. Your talent, passion, and commitment to teaching are unparalleled. It has been my great privilege to share your wisdom and provide a glimpse into your pratice. You will undoubtedly influence educators in myriad ways.

S. C-P.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I – INTRODUCTION ...... 1 Prologue ...... 1 Situating Race in Curriculum and Teaching ...... 5 Background of the Problem ...... 7 Silencing of Race ...... 8 Social Justice for Whom? ...... 9 President Trump and Race ...... 11 Purpose of Schools ...... 12 Statement of the Problem ...... 13 Rationale for the Study ...... 14 Statement of the Purpose ...... 15 Research Questions ...... 15 Significance of the Study ...... 16

Chapter II – LITERATURE REVIEW ...... 17 Section I: What Is Critical Literacy? ...... 19 Situating Critical Literacy Historically ...... 19 Defining Critical Literacy ...... 20 Section II: Critical Literacy Pedagogy and Research ...... 22 Understanding Multiple Perspectives ...... 23 Summary ...... 26 Construction of Identities ...... 26 Summary ...... 30 Reading Skills and Stances that Promote Critical Literacy ...... 30 Summary ...... 33 Representation, Resistance, Access ...... 33 Summary ...... 36 Summary of K-12 Critical Literacy Practices ...... 36 Section III: Teaching About Race and Racism ...... 37 Using Children’s Literature as Sparks for Conversation ...... 40 Summary ...... 44 Resistance to Conversations About Race ...... 46 Summary ...... 51 Summary of Teaching About Race and Racism in K-12 Schooling ...... 52 Section IV: Critical Literacy and Teaching About Race and Racism ...... 52 Section V: Critical Literacy and Racial Literacy Practice ...... 53 Consciousness-Raising ...... 54 Power ...... 55 Dialogue ...... 57 Social Action ...... 58 Summary ...... 59 Summary of Literature Review ...... 59

Chapter III – METHODOLOGY ...... 61 Overview of the Research Design ...... 62 Data Collection ...... 63 Individual Interviews ...... 63 Focus Group Interviews ...... 64 Researcher Role and Positionality ...... 65 Research Site and Participants ...... 68 Research Site ...... 68 Participants ...... 69 Erin ...... 70 Jamie ...... 70 Reid ...... 71 Sonja ...... 72 Pilot Study ...... 73 Phase 1: Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 75 Pilot ...... 76 Changes to the study ...... 77 Phase 2: Individual Interviews of Focal Participants ...... 79 Pilot ...... 79 Analysis of individual interviews ...... 80 Changes to the study ...... 81 Phase 3: Focus Group Interview ...... 82 Pilot ...... 82 Analysis of focus group interview ...... 83 Changes to the study ...... 84 Phase 4: Demographics Survey ...... 85 Pilot ...... 85 Analysis of demographics survey ...... 86 Changes to the study ...... 86 Overall analysis of the pilot study ...... 86 Methods of Data Analysis ...... 87 First Level of Analysis ...... 87 Second Level of Analysis ...... 88 Third Level of Analysis ...... 89 Analytic Memos ...... 90 Reliability and Trustworthiness ...... 91 Prolonged Engagement and Consistent Observation ...... 91 Multiple Data Sources ...... 91 Bias ...... 92 Critical Friends ...... 92 Presentation of Findings ...... 93 Limitations and Ethical Considerations ...... 94 Conclusion ...... 95

Chapter IV – SOCIOCULTURAL PORTRAITS OF TEACHERS: REFLECTIONS ON RACE AND CONSTRUCTIONS OF RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM ...... 96 Sociocultural Backgrounds of Teachers and Their Willingness to Teach About Race ...... 98 Erin: “We’re all on the same journey” ...... 100 Jamie: “Leading with the heart” ...... 102 Reid: “Time and patience” ...... 104 Sonja: “Lift every voice and sing” ...... 106 Reflections on Developing a Consciousness About Race During K-12 Schooling ...... 108 Teachers’ Reflections on Race in Their School District ...... 110 Discussing race in K-12 schools ...... 110 Erin ...... 110 Jamie ...... 111 Reid ...... 112 Sonja ...... 114 Reflections on Discussing Race in K-12 Schools ……………………………...115 Perspectives on the Racial-Justice Curriculum ………………………………...117 Constructing Definitions About the Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 117 Erin ...... 117 Jamie ...... 118 Reid ...... 119 Reflections on Constructing Definitions About the Racial-Justice Curriculum . 120 Reflections on the Sociocultural Portraits of Teachers: Perspectives on Race and Constructions of the Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 121

Chapter V – TEACHERS’ REFLECTIONS ON DEVELOPING THE RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM ...... 125 Overview, Scope, and Sequence of the Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 126 Session Framework and Sample Lessons ...... 131 Session and Title ...... 131 Notebooks and folders ...... 132 Digital texts ...... 133 Guiding questions ...... 133 Activities ...... 134 Creating ...... 134 Defining ...... 135 Applying ...... 135 Processing ...... 135 Investigating ...... 136 Reflecting ...... 136 Debriefing and Looking Ahead ...... 137 Reflections on Session Framework ...... 137

vii

Chapter V (continued) Curriculum Revisions ...... 139 Revising to include additional content ...... 139 Session 1: “Exploring Identities and Labels”—Initial plans ...... 140 Session 1 revisions ...... 142 Reflections on Session 1 revisions ...... 146 Session 5: “Privilege, Supremacy, and Being an Ally”— Initial plans ...... 146 Session 5 revisions ...... 149 Reflections on Session 5 revisions ...... 153 Revising to cchange the sequence of sessions ...... 153 Jaime ...... 155 Sonja ...... 156 Erin ...... 156 Reflections on curriculum revisions ...... 160 What Does a Racial-Justice Curriculum Entail? ...... 162 Reflections on Developing a Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 163

Chapter VI – TEACHERS REFLECTIONS ON TEACHING ABOUT RACE AND RACISM ……………………………………………………………….. 166 The Usefulness of Digital Texts ...... 166 Jamie—Using Digital Texts to Expose Blindspots ...... 167 Erin—Rethinking the Use of Digital Texts ...... 169 Reid—Increasing the Use of Digital Texts ...... 173 Reflections on the Usefulness of Digital Texts ...... 177 Facilitation Methods for Teaching About Race ...... 178 Jamie—Guiding Students During Discussion ...... 179 Digital texts ...... 179 Space to speak ...... 180 Ask questions ...... 180 Draw upon racial-literacy skills ...... 181 Provide counternarratives ...... 181 Encourage discourse ...... 181 Follow-up ...... 182 Erin—Incorporating Teambuilding ...... 182 Teambuilding ...... 183 Digital texts ...... 183 Nonverbal resposne ...... 184 Peer-to-peer talk ...... 185 Reid—Researching and Investigating ...... 185 Overarching research question ...... 186 Inquiry-based approach ...... 186 Digital text and digital text-sets ...... 186 Collaborative investigations ...... 187 Allyship and activism ...... 187

viii

Chapter VI (continued) Reflections on Facilitation Methods for Teaching About Race ...... 187 Questioning Ourselves When Teaching About Race and Racism ...... 189 Reflections on Questioning Ourselves When Teaching About Race and Racism ...... 198 What Does a Racial-Justice Curriculum Entail? ...... 199 Reflections on Teaching a Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 201

Chapter VII – IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE, POLICY, AND RESEARCH ...... 204 Reflections on the Study ...... 205 Return to Research Questions ...... 207 Implications for Developing and Teaching Curriculum About Race and Racism ...... 213 Raising Teachers’ Comfortability Discussing Race and Racism ...... 213 Taking a Researcher Stance When Teaching and Learning About Race ...... 215 Assessing Courses on Race and Racism ...... 217 Considerations for Policy ...... 220 Teacher Preparation and Education Programs ...... 220 Professional Development ...... 222 Curriculum and School Structures ...... 223 Implications for Future Research and Critique of the Study ...... 227 Concluding Thoughts ...... 229

REFERENCES ...... 231

APPENDICES Appendix A – Focal Participant Recruitment Letter ...... 241 Appendix B – Informed Consent ...... 242 Appendix C – Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 245 Appendix D – Individual Interview Protocol #1 ...... 264 Appendix E – Individual Interview Protocol #2 ...... 266 Appendix F – Focus Group Protocol #1 ...... 268 Appendix G – Focus Group Protocol #2 ...... 270 Appendix H – Sample Field Notes ...... 272 Appendix I – Demographics Survey ...... 273 Appendix J – Sparks …………………………………………………………………...275

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1 Data Collection Instruments, Procedures, Research Questions ...... 74

2 Theory-Generated and In Vivo Codes ...... 90

3 Overview of the Teachers and Their Development and Teaching of the Racial-Justice Curriculum ...... 100

4 Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions About Race and Racism ..... 127

5 Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions About Race and Racism Curriculum Scope and Sequence ...... 128

6 Questions for Educators to Consider When Teaching About Race and Racism ...... 190

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

1 Defining “identity” ...... 143

2 Reid’s “I Am…” poem ...... 143

3 The “Label Game” ...... 144

4 Race-based scenario #1 ...... 145

5 “Privilege Inventory” ...... 148

6 Reid’s reordering of session topics ...... 154

7 Sonja’s reordering of session topics ...... 154

8 Erin’s reordering of session topics ...... 154

9 NBA distribution chart ...... 174

10 SAT math scores ...... 174

11 The genetic h istory of our racial differences ...... 175

12 Exploration Work! ...... 176

13 Jaime: Facilitating conversations about race ...... 179

14 Erin: Facilitating conversations about race ...... 182

15 Reid: Facilitating conversations about race ...... 186

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Prologue

As a child I spent many summer days with my grandfather. We’d sit on my porch while he read the newspaper. Each day, he’d spend hours examining every page. It was made clear, through his example, that reading and education were important. I was almost

15 years old by the time I realized that Grandpa couldn’t read. But illiterate is not a word

I’d use to describe my Grandfather; he was the smartest man I knew.

Grandpa not only taught me to value reading, he also taught me to value myself.

His stories about life ‘back home’ in Cuthbert, Georgia and the dreams he had for his four children taught me more than any textbook ever could. At 18, Grandpa ran away from a life of sharecropping where no matter how hard he worked, he always owed the

White plantation owner in the end. In that world, Grandpa shared, he’d never thrive.

Instead, he decided to create a different world for himself and his family.

Always good with his hands, Grandpa worked in carpentry. He built the four- room house my father and his siblings were born in. Although it was common for many children to miss weeks of school during the autumn harvest to help their families in the fields, Grandpa was determined that his children’s education would not be interrupted.

That’s why he chose carpentry. And when that didn’t make him a living wage, he

chauffeured wealthy White men and women. He resolved that his children, including my father, would attend school full-time, instead of working in fields at harvest to help earn money for the family. Looking back, his insistence was surely inspired by the gaps in his own education. He’d frequently say, “I built my house right across the street from the school. There was no excuse for them not to go!” In this school filled with the children of former and current sharecroppers like my grandfather, Black children like my father were taught by Black teachers with limited resources but endless determination to instill a sense of pride in their students, despite the harsh realities of their lives as Black citizens.

It was by listening to my grandfather that I learned about the world. I learned about the many ways life was and continues to be different and hard for Black people.

My family background, which includes close ties to the U.S. South, has profoundly influenced my worldview. My father often tells me what life was like growing up in the segregated South. He tells about his all-Black school where his teachers were strict, but caring; where Paul Robeson and Jackie Robinson were his heroes; and where he felt demeaned by the supplies and books he and his siblings and neighbors received and by the overall dilapidated condition of his school compared to the all-White school just down the road. He tells me that it wasn’t until he joined the army and left the country that he felt he was treated fairly. He tells me of his experiences as an

African American living in the United States and the many ways that race has and continues to marginalize those who look like us.

Although my schooling took place in the northeast, several of my elementary and middle-school educational experiences paralleled those of my father. I, too, attended schools in which students were mostly African American; we sang the Negro National

Anthem each morning prior to reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, and memorized poems by Langston Hughes.

Years later, the context in which I teach is far different from that in which I was schooled. In this predominantly White, affluent environment, my race distinguishes me from the other teachers in the school. For the majority of my teaching career, I have been the only African American academic teacher in a school district with very few African

American students. My daughter is one of the few African American students who have completed their K-12 schooling in this district. And in the middle school where I teach, unlike the middle school I attended as a child, discussions of race and culture are rare and occur only if teachers feel comfortable engaging in those conversations.

As an African American woman teaching in this context, my background shapes my practice, and my worldview is often blurred by my identities and blended into my teaching. Here I use blur, not in the sense that my vision is hazy or weakened, but instead in the sense that such blurring actively makes different that which has been normalized and, I believe, has the potential to result in change and transformation. Over the past 15 years, I’ve participated on committees and written grants aimed at promoting diversity and providing the predominantly White student body and teachers exposure to others different from themselves. Sherman Alexie, the Alvin Ailey student dancers, and Ruby

Bridges are a few examples of speakers and performers I’ve worked to bring to this district. I find myself frequently discussing race and engaging in inquiries about systematic social injustices with my colleagues and with students whose experiences are in vast contrast to mine. Further, I’ve co-founded a committee named the Race Matters

Committee in order to make race central in the educational discourse and practices in the district.

This blending of personal and practitioner experiences has, at times, created tensions in this setting where some colleagues are reluctant to engage in discourse about issues such as race and inequalities, and where students do not always have the strategies or tools in which to engage in such discourse. Yet, I’ve found it imperative to draw others into these critical conversations. I have found it especially important to problematize this as I believe it limits and often omits discussions of race and racism. This silencing of race is prevalent across the content areas and throughout K-12 classrooms in my school district.

When I was 9, my grandfather took me ‘back home’ to Cuthbert, Georgia for the first time. Grandfather warned me to stay off the dirt road in my white socks. He said the red-clay soil would never come out no matter how much I washed them. To me, it is as if people in my school district believe that discussions of race, like the red clay soil of

Cuthbert, need to be avoided, lest they stain the white socks. To circumvent any potential discomfort and to affirm dominant narratives, students are presented with curriculum that contains a selective historical memory of the United States. Subsequently, students are incognizant of the inequalities that continue to pervade our world. As a result of silences around race and racism, they enter the classroom more unaware of societal injustices, both past and present, that profoundly influence people’s lives, and they lack the tools to examine and challenge dominant ideology.

Situating Race in Curriculum and Teaching

After reading The Watsons Go to Birmingham (Curtis, 1997/2013), my sixth graders participated in a Socratic Seminar where the topic of discussion shifted from

“What is segregation?” to “Does segregation exist in our lives today?” At first, an adamant chorus of “No’s” flooded the conversation. The experiences of the characters from this novel were fresh in their minds, and their ideas emerged from what Rosenblatt

(1969) named as an “aesthetic stance,” perspectives shaped by strong emotions as a result of the reading. They discussed how much the world had changed since 1963. They argued that what happened between the White and African American characters of this book is not happening now. Eventually there was silence. My students looked uncomfortably in my direction, perhaps for affirmation of their ideas, perhaps for guidance about what to discuss next. I matched their silence and hoped that in doing so, they would be encouraged to sit with and discuss the issue further. At last, Max raised his hand, and the student facilitator called on him to speak. “Well…on my baseball team there are no Blacks on the team. Actually we’re all White.” Sean raised his hand next.

“On the drive from my house to baseball practice, the neighborhoods look different. My neighborhood is pretty much all White, but when we drive about 15 minutes away, it looks all Black. And then a few minutes later, it changes again.” Trinity contributed,

“When I visit my cousins in the Bronx, everyone is Spanish like me.” Again, the conversation subsided. My students sat crestfallen. Finally, Molly spoke, breaking the formality of the seminar and addressed me directly. “Mrs. Cherry-Paul, is this racism?”

This vignette illuminates my observations of the ways in which adolescents are actively navigating and negotiating information about race that they receive in and out of classrooms with their teachers and as they interact with their communities. Cochran-

Smith and Lytle (2009) explained that practitioner research draws on an “emic understanding of the practice of teaching” that emanates “from practioners’ constructions of their diverse experiences in classrooms within and across communities” (p. 16). While the students’ responses in the vignette above may seem isolated, this anecdote is illustrative of my experiences over the course of my 19 years as a middle-school teacher.

The students in this class and the students I’ve continued to teach are asking for space and guidance to develop the analytical skills needed to evaluate and critique their world.

For the English language arts teacher to respond to such requests, we need to recognize that this involves educators believing that the teaching of traditional literacy skills such as reading, writing, and speaking is insufficient and requires broadening to include a critical examination of issues in historical, contemporary, social, and cultural dimensions. To avoid such work positions schools as institutions for teaching compliance to past and present unjust systems and for maintaining the status quo. In a critique of curriculum and education in schools, Ladson-Billings (2005) argued, “The paradox of attempting to use passive, irrelevant, noncontroversial curriculum and instruction to prepare students for active citizenship in a democracy and a multicultural society is startling” (pp. 70-72). While the focus of this study is on developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum for engaging in dialogue about race and racism with White, affluent, middle-school students, I located it within the larger framework of developing

curriculum that enables students to understand our collective past and to make use of lessons learned as a mobilizing force today.

Background of the Problem

Teaching and curriculum […] are inherently political; once a state, district, school, or teacher chooses specific knowledge to teach or a particular method of teaching, they have made a political decision. (Wolk, 2003, p. 102)

In this standards-driven era of education, curriculum is narrowed and various perspectives are silenced. Wolk (2003) contextualized the ways in which classroom curriculum is “highly politicized” with standards producing “sanctioned knowledge” that children are expected to learn (p. 102). This narrow approach often limits or excludes the experiences and perspectives of particular groups in the United States in lieu of dominant points of view in our society. As a result, issues related to race and racism are silenced in curriculum and instruction around the nation. Illustrative of this is the Southern Poverty

Law Center (2011) report stating that the Civil Rights Movement is not being taught in the vast majority of states. Thirty-five states do not include the Civil Rights Movement in curriculum at all, or instruction is meager, limited to the mentioning of Dr. Martin Luther

King, Jr. and his symbolic “I Have a Dream” speech. Subsequently, this omission of experiences and history from school curriculum results in dominant narratives that shape students’ collective consciousness and essentially belie the realities of racism that have been and continue to be experienced in the lives of many.

Silencing of Race

Researchers and theorists have asserted the need for better representations of racial groups and issues related to race and racism in instructional content, textbooks, resources, and materials (Banks, 1993; Cochran-Smith, 2001; Gay, 2004; Sleeter, 1992;

Sleeter & Grant, 1987). Although historically there has been some focus on school desegregation, curriculum and pedagogical approaches are also segregated (Gay, 2004;

Ladson-Billings, 2004). By segregated, I call attention to the ways that race is pocketed in curriculum into, for example, social justice units and Hispanic Heritage month or

Black History month. A focus instead is on students mastering facts rather than developing complex understandings of social reality. This reinforces the dominant social, economic, and power arrangements within society (Freire, 2000).

The nation’s reluctance to acknowledge issues related to race was noted by both the country’s first African American attorney general and the country’s first African

American president. In 2009, attorney general Eric Holder said that America “is a nation of cowards” when it comes to discussing race and President Obama explained, “We’re oftentimes uncomfortable with talking about race until there’s some sort of racial flare-up or conflict. We could probably be more constructive in facing up to sort of the painful legacy of slavery and Jim Crow and discrimination” (Cooper, 2009).

Despite these statements, President Obama’s historic election has resulted in a falsehood: We are a post-racial America. What Bonilla-Silva (2013) called a fairy tale belief, the idea that America, as never before, is a colorblind society became part of the dominant discourse from the onset of the campaign. From The Washington Post to

Newsweek to The New York Times, Obama was positioned as someone who transcended

race with a post-racial approach. This occurred in direct contrast to the ongoing queries made about his name, religious affiliations, and citizenship, thereby nullifying the notion of a new era of race relations and the creation of a post-racial country. But the illusion of racial justice with Obama’s presidency became a powerful rationale for continuing to exclude race and racism in curriculum and teaching (Bonilla-Silva, 2013).

Social Justice for Whom?

Although the nation might imagine itself as one where racial injustices are past practice, the realities of racism are visible to many students daily. Students of color, in particular, can simply look to recent headlines and news coverage to determine that there are discrepancies between how the country talks about race and how it enacts upon race.

The frequent and highly publicized killings of unarmed African American men by White police officers is one example. In 2014, the deaths of Michael Brown of Ferguson

County, Missouri and Eric Garner of Staten Island, New York resulted in rioting as well as sparking the Black Lives Matter Movement and other organized movements around the country (Chokshi, 2016). The protests and riots surrounding these killings mirror the

Los Angeles, California riots in 1991 after the brutal beating of Rodney King and the acquittal of the police officers charged. These 2017 deaths, and similar ones that continued in 2018, parallel the myriad examples of police brutality and other law- sanctioned killings of African American citizens and activists during the Civil Rights

Movement, challenging the notion of a post-racial America.

Another way in which race is downplayed and ignored is that it has been absorbed within other movements. For example, long before the recent marches, hashtags, and

‘Times Up’ buttons, African American activist Tarana Burke started the MeToo

Movement in 2006 (Garcia, 2017) to bring attention to sexual abuse of women of color, like herself. However, it was not until White actresses and other White celebrities began to share their experiences in 2017 that the movement gained national and global attention, taking centerstage during prominent events such as the 2018 Oscars. Ironically, just two years prior, the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite was created by African American digital media activist April Reign (Garcia, 2017) to draw attention to the lack of representation of marginalized communities in Hollywood. As the MeToo Movement spotlights the abuse of White women, new campaigns have emerged in response to the disparity in how women of color are treated when they report abuse and in an attempt to focus a lens on race (Garcia, 2017).

The pattern of ill-attempts to merge issues of race into activist movements continues with the 2018 Florida Parkland students who have reignited the issue of gun control in the United States. After the horrific killing of dozens of their peers, Parkland students have organized marches around the nation and met with numerous political leaders including President Donald Trump. Yet, as these student activists gain national attention, African American Parkland students have reported feeling excluded from this platform (Scott, 2018). Their stories may not mirror those of their White peers as they include concerns of gun violence not only in their schools, but in their neighborhoods.

Further, they expressed their fears of becoming targets themselves with increased police presence and guns in their school, as suggested by President Trump and other politicians

(Sanchez & Gallagher, 2018). However, the type of financial and political support the

White teens of Parkland have received has not been demonstrated for Black youth

activists. The difference in attention and treatment of the #NeverAgain Movement and the Black Lives Matter Movement (Scott, 2018) has been noted along with the ways racism continues to thrive even within social justice movements.

President Trump and Race

There have been many indicators that race relations, under a Trump presidency, would be stalled and strained. The nation listened to President Trump espouse racist beliefs about Mexicans and Muslims and watched as they became a feature of his 2016 campaign. In the cafeteria of a middle school in Michigan, seventh graders shared the new chant they had learned: “Build The Wall! Build the Wall!” Hispanic students, in particular, walked the hallways of their school in terror (Wallace & LaMotte, 2016). In

2017, President Trump’s immigration policies and executive orders tore apart countless families as undocumented immigrants were swiftly deported, leaving others—many of them children—to live in fear that they or a loved one might be next (Kulish et al., 2017).

But the events in Charlottesville, Virginia in August 2017 over the removal of a

Confederate statue have been by far the most prominent example of the country’s new way of talking about race under Trump’s presidency. While a mob of White supremacists and nationalists with Tiki torches was not a revelation to many that racism is real

(Cherry-Paul, 2017), this watershed moment has been a turning point in the minds of many educators who acknowledge the need for curriculum about race and racism in their classrooms. But for White educators, who according to the 2016 U.S. Department of

Education Report represent 82% of teachers in the nation’s elementary and secondary

schools and who often report feelings of discomfort about the topic of race (Cherry-Paul,

2018), the question that lingers is: How?

Purpose of Schools

Since the inception of schools, a “Eurocentric paradigm” (Ladson-Billings, 2000, p. 258) has been reified with curriculum that continues to focus on the accomplishments of Whites while ignoring the marginalization of others (Banks, 2006). Race matters in

U.S. society (Ladson-Billings, 2000) and contemporary debates on the aims of education and curriculum, when viewed through the lens of power, positioning, and perspective

(Jones, 2006), continue to reflect issues about the goals of teaching, learning, and schooling. These issues are “inherently political” (Wolk, 2003) as decisions are made in response to questions such as: Who are the teachers and what is the curriculum (Harding,

2009) that will prepare us for the expansion of democracy? How do school structures, assessment regimes, and classroom practices challenge or sustain the status quo? “What part do practitioners play?” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009, p. 9). Seeking answers to these questions requires discourse about oppressive political and social contexts; the ongoing work and profound achievements of individuals and groups in the pursuit of equality and justice; and the connections between local, national, and international struggles for democracy. To ignore these issues hinders students’ ability to become activists well-positioned to challenge the constructs of their lives and society (Freire,

2000).

Statement of the Problem

In addition to the myth of a post-racial society and the obscuring of race in social justice movements, other distractions from addressing issues related to race and racism in curriculum and teaching include the pressure on teachers to address state-mandated learning standards and the discomfort of teachers when it comes to discussions of race.

The implementation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in 2010 by more than 45 states may contribute to the obstacles of racial-justice curriculum in schools

(CCSS, 2010). Over the past few years, the CCSS have dominated the educational landscape in K-12 schooling and have increased the emphasis on testing. The dramatic changes in teaching brought about by the CCSS, therefore, may be interpreted as leaving little room, if any, for in-depth exploration and understandings of complex, multidimensional people and events in the American past and present, in lieu of teaching that prepares students to meet standards and pass rigorous testing.

Also, teacher discomfort is a challenge that impedes racial justice work from happening in classrooms. In White, affluent environments, there is a lack of diversity among teachers and students and their local contexts differ vastly from the global landscape in which we live. The discomfort of White teachers, coupled with their belief that racial-justice curriculum is not for White students, creates boundaries to classroom discourse about race and racism (Castagno, 2008; Foss & Carpenter, 2002; Lewis, 2001;

Milner, 2005). It is a political act to decide to teach about race and racism—and to decide not to teach about race and racism. The inclusion of race in curriculum is grounded in the research by educators and theorists who affirm the value of teaching that engages

students, even and perhaps especially those who are not disenfranchised (Derman-Sparks

& Ramsey, 2006; Foss, 2002; Lewis, 2001) in actively constructing meaning, disrupting the familiar, and challenging the status quo. Conversely, the exclusion of race and racism from curriculum reifies dominant narratives and silences others.

Rationale for the Study

Intertwined within the fabric of schooling are values, beliefs, and cultural norms that are passed on to students. Therefore, schooling is a political and moral practice that influences the knowledge students acquire, what they believe, and how they act (Freire,

2000). Noting that educational institutions are shaped by those in authority who impose their understandings, values, and morals, Giroux (1993) asserted that teachers

produce knowledge and they provide students with a sense of place, worth, and identity. In doing so, they offer students selected representations, skills, social relations, and values that presuppose particular histories and ways of being in the world. The moral and political dimension at work here is revealed in the question: Whose history, story, and experience prevails in the school setting? (pp. 372-373)

From Giroux’s perspective, schools and curricula are highly politicized as they sanction whose history, story, and experience are told. These political decisions are made in myriad ways such as when schools and teachers determine which holidays to acknowledge, whether or how to recognize Black History or Women’s History Month, and if they should supplement the official curriculum that is often driven by textbooks that present singular perspectives.

As mentioned previously, although there is a large body of research that foregrounds multiple perspectives and the importance of examining issues through multiple lenses, classroom dialogue and instruction about race and racism remain rare. A

study that explores the development of curriculum that helps students discuss issues related to racism and the experiences of educators who develop and teach this curriculum has the potential to help all teachers move forward with courageous conversations about race in their classrooms. This study explored curriculum developed and taught specifically to engage students in conversations and lessons about race and racism.

Statement of the Purpose

Drawing on practitioner-research and case study methods, including interview protocols, this study explored the insights and experiences, as described by teachers, of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum for predominantly White sixth, seventh, and eighth graders in their course Sparking Courageous Conversations:

Discussing Race and Racism.

Research Questions

The following overarching research question framed this study: What can be learned from teachers who develop and teach racial-justice curriculum designed to help their predominantly White, affluent middle-school students become more race-conscious?

Specifically, I asked the following research questions:

A. As teachers reflect on and describe the process of developing and teaching

racial-justice curriculum, what do they report they have learned?

B. What challenges do the teachers say they encounter when teaching race with

predominantly White, affluent middle-school students?

C. How do teachers respond to these challenges?

Significance of the Study

This study provided insight into the possibilities for racial-justice curriculum particularly in White, suburban environments where teachers may be resistant to, or uncomfortable about, issues related to race and racism, and students may not have encountered obstacles similar to those who have been marginalized (Derman-Sparks &

Ramsey, 2006; Foss, 2002; Lewis, 2001; Milner, 2005). The significance of this study is its potential to reconceptualize K-12 classrooms as spaces where engagement in teaching about race is a constant thread throughout instruction and curriculum. As a result, rather than avoiding discussions of race and racism due to discomfort, it becomes uncomfortable not to (Cherry-Paul, 2018).

This study adds to the body of research that informs educators of ways that curriculum and instruction can become transformative experiences that empower students to think deeply about themselves and the world (Freire, 2000). For teachers, critical literacy pedagogy reminds us that we can often contribute to the silencing or active engagement in addressing social-justice issues in curriculum, specifically race, as a result of the very methods we use in the classroom.

Chapter II

LITERATURE REVIEW

A selective literature review was conducted as way to understand and document research involving critical literacy practices and teaching about race and racism in K-12 schools. I used electronic databases to examine scholarly peer-reviewed articles, books, and empirical research studies published from 2000 to 2018. In some selected cases, works published before 2000 were used. These works were included because of the foundational contributions they have made to the knowledge base on critical literacy theory and race. For example, Freire (2000) was often cited in many of the more recent works and was seen as one of the most important works in documenting scholarship and practice on critical literacy. The same can be said for the work of theorists such as Banks

(1993), Ladson-Billings (2009), Tatum (1997), and others who have addressed racial inequities in K-12 schooling across decades and whose work is utilized to inform much of the recent research in this area. A comprehensive and systematic search of electronic databases was performed using six educational and social science search engines: ERIC,

JSTOR, ProQuest, SAGE, Taylor & Francis Journals, and Google Scholar. During the searches, I combined the following key words and terms in various combinations until an overlap point was researched, which began to yield similar works: Critical literacy and elementary school, middle school, high school; critical literacy and race, discussing race

in elementary, middle, and high school; discussing race with White students. Data-based studies with qualitative designs were prioritized because of the insight that they might yield by researchers who drew upon multiple methods to provide a robust understanding of the research and the researched. A few conceptual works were included because they were often cited in many of the empirical works. For example, the work of several researchers was used to provide conceptual understandings of, for example, racial justice

(Bell, 2005), racial literacy (Sealey-Ruiz, 2013), and Whiteness (Giroux, 1997). After removing duplicates, excluding studies that focused primarily on teacher preparation, I selected studies only conducted within the United States and studies relevant to K-12 classroom teaching. These remaining articles were examined to determine if they included empirical works on critical literacy and teaching about race.

There is a growing body of scholarly research and literature on the ways issues related to social justice, including race, are addressed in curriculum and teaching in K-12 classrooms. Therefore, this literature review particularly focused on the research around the curriculum and teaching approaches of educators as they addressed issues related to race. Such research helped me to explore the problems and potentials of teaching about race and racism, particularly in predominantly White contexts. I organized this review into four sections. First, I situated critical literacy historically. After, I reviewed research and literature around critical literacy in K-12 contexts. Next, I discussed research and literature on teaching about race and racism in K-12 settings, particularly in White- dominated spaces. Then, I discussed the potential of critical literacy practices to teach about race and racism. Finally, although it is tradition to conclude based on the review of literature, my critical stance as an educator informed this research study. As such, the

literature that I drew upon to ground this study were not only the research studies reviewed, but also the history of my practice which includes my teaching experiences with students. Therefore, I concluded by returning to a discussion of the goals and principles of critical literacy and included glimpses into the critical literacy practices of students in my classroom.

Section I: What Is Critical Literacy?

This study was framed in critical literacy theories that are grounded in the work of

Freire (2000), but draw on the work of contemporary critical scholars and practitioners

(Comber & Simpson, 2001; Janks, 2000; Jones, 2006; Lewison, Flint, & Van Sluys,

2002; McLaren, 1998; Morrell, 2008; Shor, 1992; Vasquez, 2010). I approached this study of a curriculum and its facilitation specifically developed and taught to help students gain understandings about race and racism with the knowledge that critical literacy pedagogy can provide a powerful means for interrogating how larger structures, texts, individuals, and groups are constructed.

Situating Critical Literacy Historically

Greatly influenced by the work of Karl Marx, particularly his views about labor, critical pedagogy is historically rooted in the critical theory of the Frankfurt School.

Socioeconomic inequality, according to Marx, was the significant societal problem and, therefore, social justice was believed to be dependent on economic conditions (Morell,

2008). Contemporary or “New Left” scholars extended this theory by problematizing the ways schools impart social, economic, and political ideas (Morrell, 2008). While

pedagogy represents the study of teaching and learning, critical pedagogy, scholars conceived, is about how educators teach, what is taught, and in what ways students learn

(Friere, 2000).

Critical literacy has emerged from critical pedagogical theories which maintain that teaching is an inherently political act, knowledge is not neutral, and issues related to social justice and democracy are not exclusive from but inextricably bound to teaching and learning (Comber & Simpson, 2001; Freire, 2000; Gee, 2001). Grounded in the work of Freire (2000), critical literacy is based on a sociocultural theory of language that embodies the notion that language and literacy practices are tied to issues of agency, access, equity, and ultimately to democracy and the cultivation of informed, engaged, and critical citizenship. Language and literacy practices are embedded in larger sociocultural and political contexts, and can therefore provide fertile ground for exploring, interrogating, and negotiating the social justice issues rooted in these contexts (Gee,

2001; Leland & Harste, 2000). Critical literacy continues to be theorized by contemporary critical scholars and practitioners (Comber & Simpson, 2001; Duncan-

Andrade & Morrell, 2008; Gee, 2001; Jones, 2006; Lankshear & McLaren, 1993;

Morrell, 2008; Shor, 1992, 1999; Vasquez, 2010).

Defining Critical Literacy

Critical literacy is not a teaching lesson or unit; it is an approach to teaching and learning, “a frame for thinking, planning, and enacting” (Jones, 2006, p. 70). Jones explicated three interconnected layers and tenets of critical literacy. The three layers of critical literacy—perspective, power, and positioning—assume that all texts: are

constructed by people and therefore “entrenched in perspective;” value the experiences of others unequally; and are steeped in language practices that are always “indicative and productive of power” (p. 67). Three essential tenets of critical literacy, according to

Jones, include: Deconstruction or taking texts apart to reveal power, perspective, and positioning; reconstruction or developing new representations of identities of those who have been marginalized; and social action or “working toward change” (p. 78). In classrooms, one tenet or layer may be enacted at a time before moving on to others.

Janks (2000) identified four elements to critical literacy: domination, access, diversity, and design. Domination is the recognition of institutional power systems involved in the construction of texts. Access enables students’ understanding of the dominant culture. Diversity involves honoring various, multiple viewpoints. Design is reconstructing in response to students’ generation of new meanings. Lewison, Flint, and

Van Sluys (2002) also framed critical literacy within four interrelated, undergirding tenets. Essential tenets include: “(1) disrupting the commonplace, (2) interrogating multiple viewpoints, (3) focusing on sociopolitical issues, and (4) taking action and promoting social justice” (p. 382). Disrupting the commonplace involves seeing the

“everyday through new lenses” (p. 383) in an attempt to disrupt the status quo.

Interrogating multiple viewpoints includes considering the perspectives and views of others and “paying attention to and seeking out the voices of those who have been silenced or marginalized” (p. 383). Focusing on sociopolitical issues encourages challenging unequal power relationships and, finally, a broadened interpretation of taking action can be applied to include the initiation of critical conversations around texts and speaking up about social inequities.

Although there is no one way to enact critical literacy, a central idea is that reading involves reading words, worlds, and selves all at once (Freire & Macedo, 1987).

Theorists may offer multiple, sometimes overlapping, sometimes contested, and varied terminologies. However, it is fairly agreed upon that, as Leland, Harste, Ociepka,

Lewison, and Vasquez (1999) argued, “doing critical literacy” in classrooms involves guiding learners to ask certain kinds of questions when engaging with any texts, such as:

What is the purpose of the text? How does the text try to position the reader? How does the text construct reality? Whose interests are or are not served by the ideas in the text?

What worldviews are or are not represented?

Critical literacy is developed when students have opportunities to engage in multiple readings and interpretations of texts. Park (2012) asserted that “Critical literacy can refer to the capacity to ‘speak back’ to written texts” as well as “the capacity to read the world and question societal assumptions” (p. 629). Luke and Freebody (1997) described critical readers as code-breakers, meaning makers, text users, and text analysts.

Further, society at large is a text students learn to read, decode, discuss, interpret, and critique. The teacher’s role is to engage students in a collective struggle toward interpretations of texts, which are themselves social, cultural, and personal constructions.

In this way, students are able to read not only the words but also the world around them

(Freire, 2000).

Section II: Critical Literacy Pedagogy and Research

Exploration of social justice issues can be complicated and tangled. It can be difficult for teachers to move beyond their comfort zones and their focus on teaching that

sticks to traditional academic canons (Morrell, 2008). It can be challenging for students to critique themselves and positions that have become status quo. Research has revealed that there can be a tendency for teachers to silence, marginalize, or water down complex social justice issues to avoid potential conflict in the classroom (Banks, 2001; Giroux,

1997; Ladson-Billings, 1996; Sleeter, 1992). To address this, some educators have put forth a vision of critical literacy pedagogy in curriculum, classrooms, and schools which, despite tensions that may arise, foregrounds a practice of exploring and interrogating challenging social justice issues.

A review of the research around K-12 critical literacy practices revealed several trends and significant lines of research that helped to inform my study. Specifically, such research has examined critical literacy practices to help students understand historical events from multiple perspectives, confront and challenge constructions of identities, develop deepened reading skills and stances toward texts, and address issues related to representation and access.

Understanding Multiple Perspectives

Although relevant across the content areas, there is a body of research that explores critical literacy practices to address social justice issues in social studies and language arts classrooms and to strengthen students’ understandings of historical actors and events. Clarke and Whitney (2009) encouraged critical literacy practices that include the use of multi-perspective texts that deliberately bring various points of view to the foreground. Other researchers have also examined the potential of this based on the assumption that students can more easily step into the shoes of characters or people

whose positions they may not have otherwise considered (Delaney, 2007; Calkins, Robb,

& Strang-Campbell, 2018; Clarke, 2006; Spector & Jones, 2007).

In a multiyear study designed to help students gain a more nuanced understanding of Holocaust history, Spector and Jones (2007), along with an eighth grade English teacher in a predominantly White, middle-class suburb, constructed a critical literacy unit focused on disrupting students’ influencing of dominant narratives about Anne Frank. To interrupt students’ perceptions of Anne as the hopeful hero that persisted even after they read a text, researchers engaged students in a process of finding “contradictory evidence”

(p. 43) in the text to help them assess their impressions. Spector and Jones notes that adolescents can construct hopeful versions of historical actors such as Anne Frank by

“distorting the texts they read in order to bend them into the shape of their already present cultural narratives” (pp. 46-47). Because students’ resistance to reconstructing their perceptions of Anne Frank continued, additional texts including movie clips served as visually graphic and competing narratives.

In addition to the purpose of students developing nuanced understandings about historical actors and events, critical literacy has been used to support students’ understandings about historical perspectives that can be absent in textbooks and the ways such everyday resources can be biased. In a case study of adolescents developing critical literacy practices during an inquiry project in their social studies class, Delaney (2007) interviewed seventh and eighth grade students. Students identified bias in their textbooks and questioned what was purported as fact. For example, one student who was studying

Black nurses at Pearl Harbor noticed the absence of women and African Americans in her

textbook. She remarked, “Textbooks were probably written by white men, and white men do not write about black nurses” (p. 33).

Furthering the body of research that reveals the English or language arts classroom as a promising site for spotlighting various perspectives, Clarke (2006) examined the critical literacy practices of students in a literacy unit that included historical and realistic fiction. A language arts teacher selected multi-voice novels including Witness by Karen Hesse and Seedfolks by Paul Fleischman in order for sixth graders in literature circles to examine and interrogate different viewpoints. Clarke

(2006) found that students “began to critically examine the connections of voice and power and interrogate what it means to have a voice as well as the consequences of not having your voice heard” (p. 59).

One body of research explored the critical literacy practices of students as they read realistic-fiction texts. Researchers and curriculum writers Calkins et al. (2018) have amplified the voices of those who have been marginalized within a book club unit developed around social issues. Students employ critical literacy skills to consider various types of inequities that exist for and between individuals and discuss how power, perspective, and conflicts affect characters. Specifically, teachers guide students in a focus on systemic injustices related to gender, class, and race, and students learn to assess critically when texts perpetuate or disrupt mainstream ideas and norms. Parallel to the critical literacy practices students enact to read about the lives of others different from themselves, students simultaneously practice monitoring for stereotyped assumptions they have possibly acquired as a result of problematic mainstream ideas about groups of people. These critical literacy practices inform the ideas students grow about fairness and

equity. As such, book clubs are a promising site for middle-school students to study an issue from multiple perspectives.

Summary. These studies contribute to the growing body of research that discusses how educators can integrate critical literacy practices into English and social studies that shed light on the ways various perspectives can be absent from the texts that students access in their classrooms. However, critical literacy in these studies, it seems, is a practice that is compartmentalized within units and projects, rather than embedded within the fabric of classrooms and schools. Further, it is unclear how critical literacy practices in studies focused on historical-fiction can be used to help students connect social justice issues of the past to issues that persist in the present.

Construction of Identities

In addition to studies that demonstrate critical literacies enacted to help students disrupt canned narratives and develop nuanced understandings about historical actors and events by learning from multiple perspectives, a significant line of research focuses on critical literacy practices that help students understand and navigate constructions of identities such as gender, class, and race and their intersectionalities (Comber, Thomson,

& Wells, 2001; Foss, 2002; Gainer, 2010; Heffernan & Lewison, 2005; Lalik & Oliver,

2007). Some of these studies illuminate the challenges for educators that arise when students resist such teachings and remain mired to problematic constructions of these identities influenced by societal messages.

Heffernan and Lewison (2005) conducted an inquiry of third graders who applied their critical literacy skills to make observations about their own school setting. Noticing

that their lunch tables were routinely constructed by their peers as “all-girl” or “all-boy” spaces, three girls decided to “desegregate” their lunchroom by sitting at an “all-boys” table. After learning about segregation in their classroom, the girls strategized, argued, and recruited other peers to disrupt this practice. Heffernan and Lewison (2005) noted,

“The desegregation project disrupted the Discourse of the lunchroom and allowed new identities and roles to be taken up by students” (p. 115).

In addition to gender, several studies have explored issues of socioeconomics and class with students. Comber, Thomson, and Wells (2001) studied the practices of teachers and administrators of a suburban school in an area of high poverty committed to the development of critical and multiple literacies that allow their socially disadvantaged students to engage in local civic action. In a second/third grade classroom, a teacher situated her curriculum in the neighborhood context of her students. “What was going on the children’s lives became the object of study in their classroom” (p. 455). The curriculum was reworked and revised to provide students with opportunities to research the issues they raised in their discussions, drawings, and writings.

To address the intersection of gender, class, and race, Jones (2006) enacted critical literacy to disrupt the monolithic perceptions of girls from rural, economically vulnerable families by spotlighting their specific stories and diverse identities. Following a focus group of girls from first through fifth grade, critical literacy pedagogy enabled

Jones and other educators to help students understand how power and privilege work as systems, and to identify, critique, and confront them. While several studies have demonstrated critical literacy being enacted in schools for the purposes of students’ critical reading and analysis of texts, both Jones and Comber et al. (2001) posited the

importance of text production of students in the form of critical writing as part of social action.

The research methods of Lalik and Oliver (2007) were strained and at times unsuccessful, not only as a result of students’ resistance but also in part because of school structures. To encourage adolescent girls’ disruption of cultural messages about the female body, Lalik and Oliver (2007) engaged critical literacy practices in a yearlong study with eighth grade girls. Researchers had also hoped to explore with students the intersection of gender and race within this study. However, they had to resist these efforts as students demonstrated a lack of interest in this area. An additional challenge was experienced regarding the issue of sexuality. Lalik and Oliver found that enacting critical pedagogy can be difficult within a public school setting, where some conversations may not be deemed acceptable. As a result of various challenges related to student interest and school structures, researchers found they were unable to sustain a critical literacy learning environment.

Similar to Lalik and Oliver (2007), Foss (2002) experienced challenges due to resistance by her eighth grade students. Specifically seeking to enact critical literacy with students whose identities afford them positions of privilege, Foss conducted action research with her predominantly White, Christian, middle- to upper-class eighth grade students in her English class. Although students could identify how privilege operated in the lives of the characters of their novel, Foss found that they struggled to see how privilege operated in their own lives. To help students develop a critical consciousness about the concept of privilege granted by identities including race, ethnicity, gender, and religion (p. 401) and how such distributions create inequities, Foss engaged students in

additional readings and activities such as a “privilege walk” inspired by McIntoshs’s

(1989) article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” Exposure to critical literacy, Foss found, provided opportunities for White students to take steps toward developing an awareness of and understanding identity, privilege, and power.

The concept of privilege was also explored in a study using ethnographic methods of middle-school students engaging in critical media literacy to explore reading the media as situated and social practice (Gainer, 2010). In this setting, 65% of students identified as Latino, 20% identified as White, and 14% identified as African American. While

Mexican American students expressed frustration by the common stereotype of children of color as “wild and violent” (p. 367) depicted in a movie they viewed with peers, a

White student characterized the events of the movie simply as the filmmaker’s choice.

Gainer found that White students were often unaware of their privilege and that “societal racism creates a structure that allows certain messages to be heard while others are silenced” (p. 367). Gainer, as well as Lalik and Oliver (2007) and Foss (2002), found that there were obstacles enacting critical literacies with students. When presented with an opportunity to create counternarratives in a media project, although students were aware of and could readily identify the negative stereotypes of students of color in media, they created video representations that played into these representations such as in their conscious choice of soundtrack “Hip Hop” rather than “orchestra music” in “preppie” schools (p. 370). Gainer asserted that despite tensions that can arise among students and between teachers and students, creating space in the curriculum for critical media literacy affords powerful teaching and learning opportunities through “collective analysis of media and creation of alternative representations” (p. 372).

Summary. It is clear from these studies that critical literacy can be utilized to engage students in an examination and interrogation of constructions of identity.

However, some studies yielded varying research findings that supported critical literacy in classrooms, resulting in some uncertainty about ways to navigate tensions around identity construction (Foss, 2002; Gainer, 2010; Lalik & Oliver, 2007). Although there has been research on utilizing critical literacy theory to support students’ examination of power and positioning in texts as well as to help them to confront their own perspectives, there is much less work on what educators can do when faced with students who resist.

Reading Skills and Stances That Promote Critical Literacy

Lewison, Leland, and Harste (2008) explicated the difference between critical literacy as a reading skill and critical literacy as a practice. For example, while critical thinking skills focus on logic and comprehension, critical literacy focuses on “identifying social practices that keep dominant ways of understanding the world and unequal power relationships in place” (p. 3). However, several studies have sought to address a gap in research regarding ways reading skills and stances can promote critical literacy practices.

Park (2012) worked with adolescent girls in an afterschool book club. She found that when students applied reading skills, such as visualization, they could be used as a tool to further critical literacy skills. Seventh and eighth grade girls applied a variety of reading strategies in their book club. Visualizations of characters led to discussions about identities, such as race, as related to their reading and to their own lives. Students discussed their images of characters in the novel, which launched a conversation about race. When a student made an assertion that skin color was not as important anymore as it

was during the time period of their novel, another student shared a recent racist experience of a family member and challenged this assertion. Park found that students’ use of reading strategies, specifically visualization, along with critical literacy practices, could disrupt narratives about race.

In an effort to understand students’ critical and noncritical approaches to texts, both McLaughlin and DeVoogd (2004) and Heffernan and Lewison (2009) explored what it means to take a critical stance as students interact with curriculum and texts.

McLaughlin and DeVoogd found that developing a critical stance involves readers becoming text critics by “using their background knowledge to understand relationships between their ideas and the ideas presented by the author of the text” (p. 53). Heffernan and Lewison (2009) engaged action research with students and found that developing a critical stance involves reflective distance “as a way to not just react to texts or events, but to thoughtfully decide how to respond” (p. 19).

McLaughlin and DeVoogd (2004) conceived of taking a critical stance as an extension of Rosenblatt’s (1969) continuum of aesthetic (emotional) and efferent

(factual) stances. For example, in a sixth grade classroom, McLaughlin and DeVoogd observed a teacher using juxtapositioning to help students identify multiple perspectives about World War II. Students analyzed representation in the media and then created posters that juxtaposed the visual representation of World War II they had read and discussed. Critical literacy, they argued, is enacted when educators pose questions that open the door to students developing a critical perspective and provide strategies and texts that encourage students’ practice of reading from a critical stance.

Similar to McLaughlin and DeVoogd (2004), Bean and Moni (2003) suggested problem posing as part of critical literacy practices to move students’ analysis and responses to texts beyond an efferent and aesthetic stance to a critical stance. To do so, researchers have suggested teachers “place the reader in a position of power in relation to texts” (p. 647). Bean and Moni found that students developed an understanding of how language works, the decisions authors make, and how these influence their own responses to texts. Specifically, critical literacy practices helped them to develop a critical stance that included their challenging and actively resisting perspectives on adolescents presented in the novel.

Also examining the notion of critical stance, Heffernan and Lewison (2009) explicated four dispositions of this: conscious engagement, alternate ways of being, taking responsibility to inquire, and reflexivity (pp. 19-20). Heffernan and Lewison asserted that taking a critical stance involves thoughtful reflection rather than quick reactions to help students consciously engage with texts and discussions. Conscious engagement requires readers to “question, interrogate, and investigate” which includes questioning the practices of critical literacy (p. 20). For example, in two sixth grade language arts classrooms of mostly middle-class students, researchers engaged students in taking a critical stance toward book awards and what students noted as “arbitrary criteria” (p. 21). Additionally, students engaged texts to explore the concept of prizes and awards as they related to their own lives. Heffernan and Lewison found that while some students were able to take a critical stance regarding the nomination process for book awards, it was difficult for many to critique the process of awards such as ribbons and trophies awarded to students like themselves.

Summary. These studies demonstrated the research around drawing on reading skills and reading stances as a bridge to developing critical literacy practices with students. Such approaches seem to stem from Freire’s (2000) pedagogy of affirming the critical thinking skills and knowledge ownership of students, rather than the banking model of education that views students as empty containers waiting to be filled by teachers. Instead, critical literacy is viewed as a natural part of the learning process not only in the classroom, but also in their lives (Bean & Moni, 2003; Heffernan & Lewison,

2009; McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004; Park, 2012). However, educators’ enactment of critical literacy within their classrooms contingent on the social and cultural differences between them and their students was unexplored in these studies. Such research has the potential to provide insights for exploring, interrogating, and negotiating social justice issues rooted in larger sociocultural and political contexts.

Representation, Resistance, Access

A group of studies have demonstrated the ways educators navigate the challenges of mandated curricula and restrictive school frameworks in order to make space for critical literacy in classrooms. These studies have also revealed the ways critical literacies are utilized with students to provide access to challenging texts, to affirm their racial and cultural identities, and to challenge dominant instructional canons (Lesley, 2008; Locke

& Cleary, 2011; Morell, 2008).

For example, working with urban high-school students in New York City, Morrell

(2008) found that the dominant practice in English classrooms of teaching classical literature could be interrupted through the use of critical literacy theories to analyze

canonical and contemporary literary texts. During a unit that invited analysis of the book

The Odyssey and The Godfather movie trilogy, students “debated on the role and positioning of the hero in contemporary American society” (p. 94). In addition, a “poet in society” unit opened the door for students to poetry of the Harlem Renaissance through a close reading and analysis of rap music (p. 100). In these ways, Morrell found he was able to provide students access to challenging curriculum that students might otherwise find irrelevant as well as navigate mandated curriculum through critical literacy practices that provided space for students to interrogate texts.

In addition to Morrell’s (2008) research, Locke and Cleary (2011) also sought to address issues of representation, resistance, access, and identity in a 2-year, multi-locale project. Drawing upon case study and action research methods, they observed the teaching of literature in multicultural classrooms with students labeled as “non-achievers” due to their academic record (p. 136). Together with secondary teachers, researchers designed curriculum with the following overall learning objectives: “responding to texts/attitudes to reading; the form/content relationships; the constructedness of text; and composing literary texts” (p. 123). Similar to Gainer ‘s (2010) critical media literacy work with mostly Latino middle-school students, a teacher in Locke and Cleary’s study introduced her students to “ways different versions of reality (or truth) are presented via popular media” and emphasized that “texts based in ‘popular culture’ cannot be relied upon to be telling the ‘same truths’” (p. 124 -125). For example, using multiple digital texts, students observed and discussed the ways one’s identities can be unjustly positioned and framed in texts. A succession of texts and problem-posing prompts were used by teachers with the goal of scaffolding students’ critical literacy approaches to

texts. Locke and Cleary noted several findings. Teachers’ discussion prompts challenged and engaged students as well as activated their critical reading of texts. Also, students’ cultural backgrounds influenced their critical literacy practices and opened up “an avenue to the cultural orientation of the reader as a determinant of meaning” (p. 136).

Additionally, since critical literacy includes its own metalanguage (p. 136), students adopt practices when exposed to a range of texts, similar in topic, that allow them to explore concepts such as representation, construction, and perspective. Finally, as with

Bean and Moni’s (2003) action research, Locke and Cleary found that the critical literacy approach to reading “invites and empowers students to view the positions offered by texts as both contestable and resistible” (p. 136). This, however, was difficult for some students, particularly those whose cultural backgrounds valued conformity and who had been taught at home not to challenge or confront.

Also working with academically vulnerable, diverse high-school students with a goal of engaging and challenging students, Lesley (2008) researched a literacy group consisting of six adolescents from an urban high school and two adult mentors. Similar to McLaughlin and DeVoogd’s (2004) study, Lesley situated his research in Rosenblatt’s

(1969) transactional theories of reading and critical literacy and assumed a teacher- researcher stance to support “at-risk” adolescent students’ reading and critique of texts.

As a result of an analysis of interview transcripts, Lesley found that when students had opportunities to read texts reflective of their identities and personal experiences, they were motivated to read, discuss, and critique texts above their reading levels. The novel

Monster (Myers, 1999) is an example. Lesley (2008) found that critical literacy practices could be developed with academically vulnerable students when teachers validate

adolescents’ cultural identities, non-school knowledge, and knowledge students gain from popular media.

Summary. A body of research has examined the development of critical literacy in urban environments. These studies demonstrated the ways educators value students’ funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992) acquired from their everyday lives and how this can create pathways for students to access and resist school- sanctioned, dominant forms of discourse and instruction. However, these studies showed the actions of individual teachers in individual classrooms enacting critical literacies with students. Missing is an approach to changing school structures that limit opportunities for critical literacy and require, instead, traditional methods of instruction that include dominant canons at the expense of students whose lives and perspectives are often not included. Also, few studies have explored the complexities and challenges of enacting critical literacies with predominantly White students around social justice issues such as race.

Summary of K-12 Critical Literacy Practices

The research reviewed for this study demonstrated a range of methodological approaches that include teacher research, case study, and ethnography to examine critical literacy practices of educators in elementary, middle, and high schools. Many studies described critical literacy approaches within part of a curriculum such as a project or unit.

Few studies engaged how critical literacy is sustained across the year and throughout curricula. Further, with few exceptions, these studies examined the critical literacy

practices of White teachers, many of whom work with students of color, and demonstrated varying results.

In a review of classroom practices that support critical literacy, Behrman (2006) noted an important paradox. That is, critical literacy is “described as a theory with implications for practice, rather than a distinctive instructional methodology” (p. 490).

Without a specified set of instructional strategies, there can be murkiness around effective critical literacy curriculum and instructional practices. However, critical literacy theorists implore educators against deriving static, narrowly defined critical literacy practices in lieu of those that are organic and continually redefined (Comber, 2001; Luke,

2000; McLaughlin & DeVoogd, 2004).

In short, critical literacy should translate into various classroom practices, as demonstrated in the research reviewed, that encourage students to grapple with challenging social justice issues. Such thoughtful examination and deconstruction, however, can be a slow process that requires more time than the duration of a project or unit and a change in school structures in order to achieve this goal.

Section III: Teaching About Race and Racism

In the research on the dynamics of inequality, what is clear is that there is a trend to minimize issues of race and racism and its effects on curriculum, practice, and policies.

In much of the literature on studying social inequities, there is a focus on this declining significance of race as a research focus (Bonilla-Silva, 2013; Cobhan & Parker, 2007;

Ladson-Billings, 1996; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Milner, 2003). Ladson-Billings

(1996) argued that “issues of race and racism” have been “muted and marginalized” from

the multicultural discourse in favor of an “equality of diversity” approach that positions an analysis of race as “undesirable” (p. 252). Researchers who have examined the role of race in social justice and multicultural movements have argued for critical conversations about racism that have been removed and are to be reinserted into dialogues, actions, critiques, and scholarship that include K-12 spaces.

Calling for a new momentum within social justice and multicultural movements,

Cobhan and Parker (2007) urged researchers to acknowledge the two worlds that have been created by social constructions of race in the United States—“those who are privileged and those who are not” (p. 89)—and for reinserting race into educational dialogues in order to address these disparities. One barrier that has stalled such momentum and been noted by researchers is the ways Whites have developed explanations about racial inequalities that focus on racism as prejudice rather than as systemic and institutional. Using the racial ideology he named colorblind racism, Bonilla-

Silva (2013) argued that contemporary discussions of racial inequities are framed with nonracial dynamics by Whites in an attempt to dismiss racism. By not making race a significant focus in educational spaces, opportunities for discussions about race and the critical analysis of racism can be missed in classrooms in lieu of a colorblind ideology that includes a narrowly defined construction of racism. As a result, the system of education reinforces and reproduces the system of racism. To achieve racial justice involves the proactive practice of disrupting the status quo and the dominant ideology of racial inequality in order to produce equitable power, treatment, access, and opportunities for all (Bell, 2005).

Noting this muting of race, it became important to not only focus on the research around students’ development of critical literacy skills in this review of literature, but also on students’ development of racial literacy skills. Sealey-Ruiz (2013) defined racial literacy as both a skill and a practice that enables students to “probe the existence of racism and examine the effects of race and institutionalized systems on their experiences and representation in US society” (p. 386). As a result, dominant racial members of society “adopt an anti-racist stance” and people of color “resist a victim stance” (p. 386).

Though many studies have focused on social inequities such as gender and economic disparities, a body of research has focused on studying teaching about race.

Significant lines of research in these studies on students of color in K-12 classrooms center around making curriculum more culturally relevant, affirming students’ racial and cultural identities, and helping students recognize oppressive structures and develop skills to combat racism (Banks, 2006; Delpit, 2008; Ladson-Billings, 2009; Milner, 2005;

Noguera, 2003; Tatum, 1997; Singleton & Linton, 2006; Valenzuela, 1999). However, there has been much less research on teaching about race and racism with White students.

This is important because although recent years have been marked by a string of violent events across the United States that have put a spotlight on issues of race and racism, including the 2017 White Nationalist events in Charlottesville, Virginia, efforts to insert race into White-dominated educational spaces seem to disssipate with the ebbs and flows of national and media attention. Subsequently, a sustained focus on developing curriculum and teaching that provide opportunities for discussions about race and the critical analysis of racism with White students can be easily interrupted and ultimately avoided. The following review of research and literature aims to maintain a sustained

focus on the possibilities of teaching about race and racism, particularly in White K-12 contexts.

In reviewing the research that has been focused on teaching about race, a few clear patterns emerged. One such pattern is educators’ use of children’s literature with the assumption that reading stories that seem to forefront race with students will support them in having conversations about race and learning about racism. The second pattern which emerged from a review of the literature is the existence of resistance toward discussions of race on the part of both teachers and students involved in the research.

Using Children’s Literature as Sparks for Conversation

Noted in the research are a variety of ways in which children’s literature, including textbooks, have been used by educators to help students learn about race and racism. Research has shown that some language arts and social studies teachers have come to rely on children’s books to help students become more race-conscious and to recognize racial inequities. Additionally, children’s literature has been used to guide students’ discussions about race and racism with their peers (Alridge, 2006; Macaluso,

2017; MacPhee, 1997; Moller, 2002; Rogers & Mosley, 2006; Wolk, 2003; Young,

2012).

For some educators, it was assumed that by reading and discussing historical fiction novels that include examples of racism in English language arts classrooms, students would come away from the experience with a heightened awareness of how injustices operate in society. For example, reading To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

(1960/1982) has become a quintessential experience for many middle-school students in

the United States, taught by educators who view it as an authentic text about race

(Macaluso, 2017). Problematic in this approach is that simply by reading this text alone, students miss opportunities to unpack examples of racism inherent in this text, deconstruct these examples, and bridge inequities of the past to those of the present. Also, when educators deflect complex conversations about race and instead focus on such issues only through the experiences of the characters, racism is positioned as an event from the past and a work of fiction, rather than a structure that persists and thrives currently. Further, students’ perspectives on race, influenced by societal messages they have come to understand from as early as kindergarten (Winkler, 2009), can go unchecked and unchallenged. This was revealed in a fourth grade classroom of predominantly White students, where various children’s books, such as Runaway Home by Patricia McKissack (1997) and The Heart of the Chief by Joseph Bruchac (1998), were used to support students’ discussions of social justice issues. Moller (2002) discovered that students’ discussions about race in connnection with texts included stereotypical and racist views. When educators take a peripheral role during students’ discussions of historical-fiction novels, critical decisions educators make to intervene or remain silent as sterotypes are perpetuated determine whether, or to what extent, these views are disrupted. Although this research has suggested that children’s literature can be a way to expose students to race and racism, without strategies to engage critically with these texts, students can draw oversimplistic and erroneous conclusions about the ways race continues to matter in the world today and sterotypes can be reified.

Although some studies have suggested that using children’s literature is a sufficient way to teach students about race and racism, their findings indicated the need

for more longitudinal qualitative research to provide insights into the complicated process of helping White students learn about race and racism through literature. Two studies involved action-research methods to examine a genre unit in English language arts classrooms that spanned across a few weeks or months (MacPhee, 1997; Young, 2012).

Both studies used action research methods to explore the types of understandings readers constructed in response to historical-fiction picture books. During a 4-month study of predominantly White, suburban fifth grade students, Young (2012) observed students who engaged historical-fiction picture books about the Japanese American internment and found that students made interpretations about texts based on the craft of the authors and illustrators such as symbolism, irony, and imagery. During this process, students made comparisons of injustices across various groups of people, specifically Japanese

Americans, African Americans, and Native Americans. Students recognized discrimination demonstrated in their books and empathized with the characters. Yet, the complexities of racism seemed beyond their grasp. MacPhee found that her first graders’ discussions and drawings demonstrated their feelings about “unjust situations or racially- motivated events” (p. 35) and asserted that demonstrations of sensitivity and empathy for marginalized groups not reflective of their own racial identities are a first step toward helping students confront social issues such as racism. While this may be a first step with younger White students who are “ethnically-encapsulated” (p. 33) to combat the societal messages they come to understand about people of color, fifth grade students are able to do more than recognize injustices and empathize with characters. More in-depth studies might reveal ways students can move from an aesthetic stance (Rosenblatt, 1969) that goes beyond perspectives shaped by their emotions to a critical stance (McLaughlin &

Devoogd, 2004). However, to do so involves students’ use of their “background knowledge to understand relationships between their ideas and the ideas presented by the author of a text” (p. 53). This can be challenging for White students who have had limited experiences to learn about and discuss racism. Therefore, it is unlikely that a reliance on children’s literature to teach students about race helps move students to a critical stance where more advanced understandings about the ways racism works systemically and how to disrupt it can be achieved.

An example of a longitudinal, qualitative study examining White students’ interactions with literature to learn about race and racism is Rogers and Mosley’s (2006) ethnographic research in a second grade classroom during the course of an academic school year. To explore the ways White students and White teachers take up race in the literacy curriculum, the researchers selected texts that presented issues from multiple perspectives and time periods and were written and illustrated by African Americans. The researchers observed the ways students developed racial literacy through constructions of

Whiteness, White privilege, and White allies as they read and examined books told through the perspectives of African Americans. Rogers and Mosley observed students’ conversations move beyond noticing and naming race to students’ constructions of

Whiteness and racism. Further, they noted that these constructions could be problematic when Whites were depicted as passively participating in racism or being hard workers or enforcers of discrimination. Using children’s literature alone, therefore, limited students’ abilities to explore developed understandings about White privilege and to critique the actions of other White people. Rogers and Mosely advocated for the inclusion of “White allies” to disrupt the hero and heroine narratives in literature that result in the belief by

White children that “actions for justice are extraordinary” (p. 480). Instead, they called for counternarratives that demonstrate “ways that whiteness can be used to benefit society, rather than to reiterate racism” (p. 480). Further, Rogers and Mosley found that simply discussing race is not enough and argued for guided instruction that helps students develop racial literacy. A review of the literature around teachers’ use of children’s literature that includes issues related to race and racism has suggested there has been less focus on students’ reading and discussing texts in ways that encourage a critical analysis of inequities and help them to develop racial literacy sills.

In addition to teachers’ relying on historical-fiction picture books and novels in language arts classrooms to provide students with insights about race and racism, one study examined the effects of teachers’ reliance on history textbooks (Aldridge, 2006). In an examination of six popular high school textbooks, Aldridge found that these texts presented canned narratives about historical figures such as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther

King, Jr. as well as oversimplistic, white-washed representations of historical events.

Aldridge underscored the importance of publishers of these textbooks reconceptualizing how information is presented and providing a more fluid pathway for students to make connections between past and present injustices. Further, he urged teachers to move away from an overreliance on textbooks and instead encourage students to use other media such as online sites and to conduct interviews in order to collect primary sources that help them develop more nuanced understandings of history.

Summary. The research demonstrated that for many teachers, using literature was an entry point for discussing challenging issues with students such as race and racism.

However, because research has supported that young students are, in fact, not colorblind

and enter school already having understandings about societal racial norms (Winkler,

2009), further research is needed to clarify how historical fiction helps young children deconstruct their already preconceived notions of race. Additional research is needed to shed light on the ways literature and textbooks can influence students’ understandings of racism beyond unfortunate, past acts of hate to that which exists in the lives of many today.

Teachers influence not only what, but how students read. Wolk (2003) raised an important point in that the notion of a “child-centered” classroom can be defined by some teachers as one that is devoid of messy, complex discussions about race. In lieu of explicitly addressing race and racism, children’s literature and textbooks are used to bring such issues to light. A review of the research has shown that children’s literature can expose students to a variety of experiences and issues about which they may otherwise have little knowledge. Textbooks, however, tend to offer one-dimensional, obscured representations of historical actors and events. The research has also suggested that reliance on these texts is an insufficient method for teaching about race and racism, particularly when teachers seemed to do so to assuage their own discomfort around discussing race and as an attempt to compensate for White students’ lack of exposure to others who are different from themselves. This is problematic in two main ways. First, implicit racism in texts that is not explicitly addressed and silences during discussions where students share perspectives that perpetuate stereotypes can reify racist perspectives that children glean from societal messages. Second, without explicit instruction, it is unlikely that students will develop racial literacy skills or critical literacy skills to deconstruct racism and seek out counternarratives. As a result, students’ understandings

of racism can be limited to unfortunate, past acts of hate, rather than systemic and ongoing events of the present.

Additional longitudinal qualitative research could reveal more robust data that provides insights into the ways children’s literature, that includes but is not limited to historical fiction, along with explicit instruction can help students closely examine their own experiences around race and the ways racial inequality impacts their lives.

Quantitative data such as surveys could help to inform practice by demonstrating for teachers the kinds of racial literacy skills students are and are not able to obtain through reading and discussing literature and textbooks in the absence of explicit instruction.

Resistance to Conversations About Race

Also noted in a review of the research that focused on teaching students about race and racism were the complexities around taking up this work in various contexts.

Although there has been significant scholarship and literature on teaching about race in

K-12 education that focuses primarily on urban contexts with students of color (Bolgatz,

2005; Delpit, 2008; Ladson-Billings, 2009; Milner, 2005; Noguera, 2003; Roberts, Bell,

& Murphy, 2008; Tatum, 1997), there has been less focus on teaching about race in K-12 classrooms with White students and by White teachers. Even still, there are fewer studies on teachers of color teaching about race with White students. Among this research, the ways teachers as well as students could resist discussions of race were revealed

(Castagno, 2008; Flynn, 2012; Haviland, 2008; Lewis, 2001; Schaffer & Skinner, 2009).

With this focus, I have examined research that brings to light the complex range of

responses around teaching about race in predominantly White contexts and explored the limitations and possibilities of taking up such work in K-12 classrooms.

Lewis (2001) examined the “racial messages students receive” (p. 782) in a predominantly White, suburban school to challenge assumptions around who needs to learn about race and racism and who does not. For example, an administrator and teacher explained, “You understand that this is a pretty homogeneous school” and “We don’t have much diversity here” (p. 785). Lewis found that educators from a White suburban elementary school held monolithic beliefs about what it means to be White as well as what it means to be Black. Further, when students of color sought support from their

White teachers after racist statement made by peers, teachers responded in ways that minimized students’ racialized experiences and instead embraced a colorblind approach.

Giroux (1997) defined Whiteness as the identities Whites assume that have been “shaped within a broader racist culture” which privileges them based on their racial features

(p. 314). Rather than taking an approach to examine Whiteness as Giroux explicated,

Lewis found that, instead, the approach in this school was to downplay, deny, deracialize, or dismiss incidents in connection to race, which was deemed most appropriate by both

White teachers and White parents.

Similar to observations made by Lewis (2001) about White teachers, Haviland

(2008) observed what she called power-evasive ways White teachers spoke and behaved about race, including “avoiding words,” “asserting ignorance or uncertainty,” and

“silence” (p. 44) in an eighth grade classroom and a teacher preparation seminar. For example, an eighth grade student equated prejudice with just having an opinion, and a student-teacher grappled with racial profiling as racism. Haviland devised the term White

Educational Discourse (WED) to describe her observations of the ways Whitness impacts

White-dominated eductional settings. Specifically, Haviland observed the ways in which

“Whiteness was brought to life regarding issues of race, racism, and White supremacy in

White-dominated educational settings” (p. 44). By drawing attention to the specific ways in which White teachers’ and students’ speech and behaviors serve as barriers during discussions about race, Haviland argued, they can begin to interrupt such practices.

Other studies similarly noted White teachers’ avoidances and downplaying of race, and how White students struggle to discuss race in the classroom, perhaps in response to their teachers’ resistance. Similar to Haviland (2008), Flynn (2012) and

Castagno (2008) each used ethnographic methodologies across an academic school year in their individual studies in order to avoid researching isolated attempts to teach about race and interrogate power and privilege, such as what would occur in a standalone unit of study. Also, they each took on the roles of researcher and participant.

When working with White, privileged eighth grade students, Flynn (2012) found that students reacted in complex ways. For example, during an activity where students were asked to fill out a score card about race adapted from McIntosh (1990), many students found it challenging to keep a focus on race. Several students deflected or expressed having conflicting identity markers such as gender and religion. Other students experienced difficulties due to guilt about their privilege. Flynn (2012) noted, “Whether out of a genuine desire for fairness and justice, or an ability for unwillingness to acknowledge modern racism, some White students were not able to move past their guilt and resistance” (p. 105). Yet, Flynn and the educators of this study developed scaffolds that included explicitly raising issues such as the Black-White paradigm that limits

discussions of racism to African Americans, as well as the economic and political consequences of racism. Such emphasis helped students to recognize and acknowledge the prevelance of racism in their lives.

Castagno (2008) also found that White teachers and students struggled to acknowledge how Whiteness is normalized and that race matters in their lives. Castagno argued that race is important to take up with middle-school students, especially as their

“identities are being formed and contested” (p. 314). Noting the psychological and emotional changes of adolescents that include the constructing and shifting of identities,

Castagno contended that Whiteness is one such identity, although there is no one way to define it. However, Castagno argued that characteristics of Whiteness include power, dominance, privilege, and silencing of racism and that schools do more to legitimize

Whiteness rather than to dismantle it (p. 320). Interviewing and observing the classroom practices of teachers across two middle schools, one serving predominantly students of color and one serving predominantly White students, Castagno found that White teachers either silenced students who brought up race during discussions, used coded language such as “eastside” and “westside” to make distinctions about students that were race- and class-based, and were themselves silent in response to racist behaviors by students.

Further, teachers tended to obscure the ways race matters in society by conflating culture with race. To disrupt what she named as silence and colormuteness around race in school districts, Castagno called for the delegitimation of Whiteness (p. 327). Within a predominantly White teacher workforce, she argued, there is need for an examination of the structural and systemic nature of Whiteness by all teachers, and particularly with

White students, in order to achieve greater equity in schools and, thus, society at large.

Also noting the predominance of White K-12 teachers, Milner (2003) spotlighted the gap in research on the experiences of teachers from underrepresented groups.

Employing a case study approach that included interviews and observations, Milner laid the groundwork for this research by first examining teacher attrition and then the experiences of an African American teacher in a suburban high school teaching predominantly White students. While teacher attrition and the factors that influence this are outside of the scope of my study, I have included this research in the review of literature to shed light on the experiences of an African American high-school English teacher, Dr. Wilson, and her experiences discussing racism with White students. I have also included it because of the ways it, at times, has paralleled my own experiences as a middle-school English teacher in a predominantly White school district.

There were several major findings from Milner’s (2003) study. Milner found that

Dr. Wilson experienced social and collegial isolation by colleagues who avoided and seemed to resent her. This affected Dr. Wilson’s confidence as an educator, which threatened her sense of efficacy. A second finding was the burden that Dr. Wilson endured to confront, challenge, and change negative stereotypes she believed her students and colleagues held about African Americans. Her teaching regularly involved sharing personal stories about her life and including short stories and books by authors such as

Alice Walker in order for her White students to come to know and admire African

American writers. Such work to challenge and change perceptions was particularly challenging with Dr. Wilson’s colleagues. As one of few African Americans in the school, Milner found that Dr. Wilson was often overwhelmed by this societally influenced, self-imposed responsibility. Milner called for further qualitative studies about

teacher self-efficacy that can illuminate a variety of contexts and cultural factors impacting the experiences of classroom teachers.

Summary. In their books that guide educators through teaching about race in

K-12 classrooms, both Derman-Sparks and Ramsey (2006) and Singleton and Linton

(2006) asserted that conversations about race are often difficult and examining Whiteness can be the most challenging of these discussions. This challenge is echoed across the research, including the studies reviewed. This suggests the need for further research on the specific knowledge and tools that are needed for White teachers to develop the propensity for teaching about race and racism as well as the kinds of support needed by teachers of color working with White students.

This research revealed attempts by White teachers to create and maintain colorblind environments and instead emphasize kindness in order to minimize racism.

Subsequently, this hinders White students from receiving guidance and opportunities that enable them to explore race in meaningful ways. This includes developing the skills to identify power and privilege as constructs that undergird problematic understandings of race and to critically and safely examine their own preconceived ideas about race.

The majority of the research studies reviewed used ethnographic methodologies to examine the avoidance and resistance around teaching about race in predominantly White

K-12 classrooms. This opens up possibilities for future research that might include case studies as well as practitioner research, which may illuminate the unique experiences of teachers and students who are immersed in a particular setting. Such research can continue to shed light on potential problems and pathways for teachers and students who engage conversations about race and racism in their classrooms.

Summary of Teaching About Race and Racism in K-12 Schooling

The studies reviewed revealed the challenges of taking up race in K-12 contexts.

Obstacles included questioning the relevance of race in dominant spaces, silencing, and resistance. Both teachers and students grappled with these obstacles. An important limitation of these studies was the absence of the voices of teachers of color in predominantly White K-12 spaces. It is important to note this absence in order to spotlight important insights that are missing as a result.

Section IV: Critical Literacy and Teaching About Race and Racism

During his address at a meeting of the National Education Association in 1896,

Albion Small proclaimed, “Sociology knows no means for the amelioration or reform of society more radical than those of which teachers hold the leverage,” and teachers “shall not rate themselves leaders of children, but as makers of society” (Kliebard, 2004, p. 53).

In short, Small suggested that teachers have the power to change society.

Schools have long been expected to be a moral compass for students where social justice issues are addressed. Although critical literacy has been positioned as a practice that can guide teachers toward this goal, education and social science research literature has noted several limitations, specifically when it comes to teaching about issues of race and racism. First, it can be challenging for teachers and schools to view curriculum as more than the coordination and execution of planned instruction. There may be little room in curricula for teaching about race, outside discussions about historical events such as the Civil Rights Movement and within units during, for example, Hispanic Heritage or

Black History month. Second, some teachers doubt whether it is necessary for teachers to

guide students in this area in the classroom at all. In dominant, homogeneous environments, the belief that those issues are not our issues may exist. Third, teaching about race and racism is complex. Teachers may question: What do I do with the concerns raised by my students? How do I prevent them from feeling a sense of hopelessness about the problems of the world? And fear of saying ‘the wrong thing’ sometimes causes silence. Research has demonstrated that, as Giroux (1997) asserted, the most challenging issues to discuss with White students are racism and White privilege, especially when discussions of Whiteness are limited to racism and oppression. Yet, research has demonstrated that silences of race and racism preserve and normalize the narrative of Whiteness with curriculum and instruction that render the experiences of racialized groups invisible.

Overall, it can be challenging for teachers to view students as active constructors of knowledge, specifically about race, and to engage them in curriculum where they illuminate, analyze, and discuss inequalities as they identify their own positions, ideologies, and assumptions (Banks, 1993; Freire, 2000). Yet, if an essential mission of schools is that of democratic citizenship, fostering the principle that “an important purpose of knowledge construction is to help people improve society” (Banks, 1993, p. 9), then teaching about race in order to disrupt racism is critical in curriculum in teaching.

Section V: Critical Literacy and Racial Literacy Practice

In the following sections, I explore four overarching principles of critical literacy theories (Freire, 2000) by providing a glimpse into critical literacy and racial literacy

practices at work in my sixth grade English language arts classroom. These interrelated, nonlinear tenets are vital to the goal of critical literacy, which is liberatory and problem- posing education. They include: consciousness-raising, power, dialogue, and social action. I use experiences in my own classroom to demonstrate how these principles of critical literacy can provide a way to explore how teaching and learning may be approached as processes of collective interpretation and contestation. Further, these experiences demonstrate how students develop racial literacy in order to “probe the existence of racism” (Sealey-Ruiz, 2013, p. 386) and discuss the ways race matters.

Finally, when engaging critical literacy in curriculum and teaching, the world is a socially constructed text that is read and critiqued. Therefore, I conclude by summarizing Freire’s conceptualization of critical literacy as praxis that, through reflection and action, transforms the world.

Consciousness-Raising

It can be conceived that critical literacy, as an educational response to oppressive power relations, is work exclusive to urban educational environments where the majority of learners are students of color. It is in these contexts, it can be argued, where there is the greatest need for critical literacy practices that can help students examine and resist dominant narratives (Morrell, 2008). It is also argued that critical literacy and the consciousness-raising dialogues that occur are essential as well with White students in affluent, suburban contexts who may not have experienced and are often unaware of injustices (Derman-Sparks & Ramsey, 2006; Foss, 2002).

For example, in my sixth grade classroom, when students were asked to write about if they believed race mattered in society and, if so, when did they first come to realize this, 19 White students reported that they did not believe race did matter until

Trump’s presidential election and subsequent 2017 Muslim ban or until the 2017 events of Charlottesville, Virginia. Two students, one who identified as Chinese American and another who identified as Indian American, recalled much earlier recollections from when they were 5 or 6 years old. I shared my own memories of my first understanding of race from when I was 6. As a class, we could not help but notice the differences in our recollections and surmised that for some of us, particularly those from groups who have been traditionally marginalized, a consciousness of race and racism began much earlier than for others. Therefore, consciousness-raising conversations are particularly important, especially in environments where the majority of the students may not recognize oppression beyond large-scale acts of hate.

Power

Essential to critical literacy pedagogy is the creation of classrooms where learning is a process for both teachers and students. Student voices, however, are central. In traditional classroom spaces, Freire (2000) theorized, a “banking” system establishes a hierarchy that positions teachers as knowledge givers and students as knowledge receivers (p. 72). Instead, critical literacy approaches in classrooms encourage students to speak with authority using the knowledge they already possess. Foundational to critical literacy is that power dynamics between teachers and students are shifted. Together, teachers and students develop a praxis that recognizes students as knowledge holders who

are also actively constructing knowledge by interrogating social conditions and issues significant to their lives. Problem-posing education, therefore, is a process that involves

“a constant unveiling of reality” (p. 81) as educators and students work together to reveal, respond to, and develop new understandings of societal issues. Jones (2006) explicated that “A critical literacy lens focuses on three interrelated layers: perspective, positioning, and power” (p. 67). When engaging a critical literacy framework, teachers and students consider multiple points of view, ideas that are centered and those that are marginalized, and how power can be used to silence and oppress.

During a discussion about Columbus Day in my sixth grade classroom, tensions rose when some students spoke in favor of Indigenous People’s Day instead and challenged others’ ideas regarding the significance of this holiday. After a rich conversation that included varying perspectives and mixed feelings, one student suggested that we each make a t-chart in our notebooks and list the pros and cons of celebrating Columbus Day. Although the student did not voice this as a rationale for her suggestion, this recommendation served multiple purposes. First, it provided each of us— students and teacher—time to reflect silently and independently on a challenging conversation. Second, it positioned all participants as knowledge holders who have ideas to contribute, whether they initially took part in the conversation or not. Third, students were challenged to think about power and race as they evaluated different perspectives about Columbus Day and those who have been silenced as they constructed a list that included the benefits and drawbacks of this holiday. After 15 minutes, students shared their ideas and co-constructed one list that helped them to evaluate the issue further.

Critical literacy calls for teachers to relinquish their positions as knowledge-holders and

“bankers.” Instead, a more fluid power relationship exists between students and teachers that allows for an acute awareness of power by bringing forth multiple points of view and a sustained critique of issues.

Dialogue

Critical literacy theorists assert that dialogue is the basis for democratic and emancipatory education that pushes against a banking educational approach that treats students as vessels of the institution’s attempt to indoctrinate them to dominant ideologies

(Freire & Macedo, 1987; Shor & Freire, 1987). To disrupt the traditional teacher-student hierarchy, Freire (2000) emphasized the role of dialogue in shifting power from teacher to students. The teacher is a facilitator who uses dialogue to support students’ construction of knowledge. Dialogue, which includes the posing of questions as well as response, can lead to a wide exchange of different points of views, opportunities to understand varying perspectives, and raising of new issues. True dialogue engenders respect and provides an invitation to listen. Students presume the role of subjects (Freire

& Macedo, 1987) who partner with the educator to set the goals, directions, and even assessment criteria and procedures of the curriculum (Shor, 1992).

In the previously mentioned example about students discussing the merits and pitfalls of Columbus Day, dialogue revealed opposite views of some students in my sixth grade classroom as well as an open-mindedness and, in some cases, a reconstruction of

Christopher Columbus. The discussion invited students to listen, to deconstruct canned narratives, and to contemplate the reasons for alternative points of view within a dialogic atmosphere. Through such discourse, students challenged the status quo. Their ideas

about what they believed to be true were mediated, resulting in reconstruction and new understandings of the meaning of Columbus Day for different groups of people. It is the goal of critical literacy that dialogue promotes an understanding of different views, which frees students from dogmatism so that they may have a stronger and realistic understanding about each other as well as societal issues (Freire, 2000). Fostering dialogue, particularly among adolescents, leads to critical thinking as dialogue makes it possible to take into account power and the positioning of others (Freire, 2000). From this perspective, critical literacy is a knowledge construction discourse that develops critical thinking.

Social Action

In addition to breaking silences about injustices through reading and discourse, an essential tenet of critical literacy is taking social action. For many students, the notion of activism can seem grand and beyond their abilities, based on the examples they have been presented with in school, such as the actions of Dr. King and Dolores Huerta.

However, critical literacy educators help students understand the various ways of taking action and their abilities to disrupt injustices in powerful ways.

For example, Day of Silence, a national event that spotlights the silence and erasure of LGBTQ youth in schools, influenced the fifth and sixth grade students in my school district. Noticing that a Gay Straight Alliance (GSA) club existed only for high- school students and not for middle-school students, they took action. Administrators, who believed the students were too young to participate in this club, initially met their request for a GSA with resistance. In response, students wrote letters to administrators and the

Board of Education arguing for the existence of a GSA in their middle school and then sought out faculty advisors to support their efforts. Ultimately, the goal of critical literacy is to sustain informed, social action (Freire, 2000).

Summary

Critical literacy encourages stepping outside of the familiar and the unquestioned, in order to examine the powerful factors that shape one’s life and experiences and those of others. Therefore, critical literacy is enacted when educators and students are not wedded to, but actively reject the notion of business as usual practice, and instead work together to dismantle oppressive structures in order to achieve social justice. Critical literacy is not a lesson, unit, or project that is added to existing curriculum. It is pedagogy based on praxis, the fluid back-and-forth movement between reflecting and acting, in order to bridge the gap between theory and transformational action (Freire, 2000).

Moreover, sustaining a focus on race in praxis, critical racial literacy (Nash et al., 2018) involves the students and teachers working together to “recognize, refute, critique, and synthesize the structure of race in daily living” (p.260), particularly by intentionally focusing our gaze on race in curriculum and teaching.

Summary of Literature Review

Critical literacy theorists describe readers as active interrogators and constructors of text meaning (Comber & Simpson, 2001; Luke & Freebody, 1997). Texts, broadly conceived to extend beyond print to digital, include books, essays, photographs, videos, images, symbols, songs, culture, and social and institutional structures (Avila & Pandya,

2013; Hill & Vasudevan, 2008; Vasquez, 2010). Language practices involve power, and texts represent particular views and serve particular interests (Jones, 2006). In addition, the teacher’s role is to engage students in collective struggle toward the interpretation of texts, which are themselves social, cultural, and personal constructions (Freire, 2000).

Critical literacy theories assert that texts and readers are influenced by the culture in which they are embedded and examining texts can provide a bridge to self-examination and social critique.

This study was informed by a review of research that explored the potentials and possibilities of enacting critical literacy practices and teaching about race and racism.

Freire (2000) argued against the traditional teacher-student relationship in which teachers transmit and students passively receive knowledge—what Freire called the “banking model” (p. 72) of education. Instead, Freire conceptualized a praxis of students and teachers working together to engage in multiple readings and interpretations of texts, including the world, and openly discussing and critiquing the cultural assumptions embedded in them. This study thus aimed to explore such praxis of predominantly White middle-school students and their teachers in a course developed specifically for them to examine race and racism.

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

To review, this in-depth qualitative study (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007) explored how four teachers described their experiences of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum. The overarching question explored in this study was: What can be learned from teachers who develop and teach racial-justice curriculum designed to help their predominantly White, affluent middle-school students become more race-conscious?

Specifically, I asked the following research questions:

A. As teachers reflect on and describe the process of developing and teaching

racial-justice curriculum what do they report they have learned?

B. What challenges do the teachers encounter when teaching race in this context?

C. How do teachers respond to these challenges?

As previously described, this study emerged from my own observations and reflections about teaching and learning, specifically what I perceive as a culture of silence around issues related to race. As an African American middle-school teacher in a predominantly White context, I have been concerned about gaps in curriculum and teaching about race and racism. I am committed to the advancement of racial justice in society and feel a sense of urgency to disrupt the silences that exist around race in

educational spaces. I believe teachers have the unique ability to examine this phenomenon and to conduct research that can inform practice.

In this chapter, I describe the methodology in greater detail. I provide an overview of the research design and data collection methods. I establish my role and positionality and introduce the research site and participants. I review the pilot study including analysis of data and proposed changes. Finally, I discuss the methods of data analysis and the strengths and limitations of this study.

Overview of the Research Design

In consideration of the research questions, I conducted an in-depth interpretive study (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007) that used qualitative research methodologies to examine how participants made meaning of their instructional experiences. I drew upon practitioner-research and case study methods to investigate and examine the specific situations, experiences, and phenomena, as described by each of the teachers who participated in this study. These methods made it possible for me to address, as Yin

(2006) stipulated, what happened or to explain how or why did something happen as explained directly by each of the teachers. Further, these methods enabled me to

“illuminate a particular situation, to get a close (i.e. in-depth and firsthand) understanding of it” (p. 112) as I explored the experiences described by the teachers who developed and taught racial-justice curriculum in their middle school.

Data Collection

In order to develop a sense of patterns, behaviors, and the perceptions of each participant, I engaged the following:

• analysis of the racial-justice curriculum designed by participants;

• emerging artifacts such as revised curricular materials;

• field notes in teacher journals;

• analytical memos;

• researcher journal;

• open-ended, in-depth, semi-structured, one-on-one interviews (lasting about

60 minutes);

• open-ended, in-depth, semi-structured focus group interviews (lasting about

60 minutes);

• surveys completed by participants/

Individual Interviews

To gain a robust understanding of the ways each teacher described his or her experience teaching the racial-justice curriculum, I conducted one-on-one, semi- structured, in-depth interviews that were about 60-minutes in length with each teacher in order to examine what the teachers were thinking and learning, and how they navigated the challenges of the curriculum. Examples of individual interview questions were: What decisions have you made about developing the overall curriculum and teaching the curriculum based on the knowledge you have about your students? In what ways do you determine the effectiveness of the curriculum and your teaching? What do you believe are

the background, experiences, or knowledge teachers need to develop and teach racial- justice curriculum? Individual interviews occured throughout the study.

Focus Group Interviews

Additionally, I conducted in-depth focus group interviews that were about 60 minutes in length. I asked open-ended questions to invite each teacher’s meaning-making of his or her experiences. I included questions that requested that the teacher make choices such as to reorder, label, categorize, and attribute cause and effect in order to help me to understand their theories. Follow-up prompts, in response to each of the teachers’ comments, were used to elicit additional details in order to gain a deeper understanding of their ideas and experiences. Examples of focus group questions were: Can you list the following issues raised in the racial-justice curriculum in order of most importance to you: defining race, colorblindness, defining racism, supremacy, privilege, being an ally?

In what ways might the identities of students influence the development and teaching of the racial-justice curriculum? Let’s look at the 80 minutes of the course in 10-minute increments. Can you tell me what’s happening in each of these increments? One focus group interview occurred at the beginning of the study. The purpose of this interview was to engage and capture the collective memory as the teachers reflected on the racial-justice curriculum they had developed. Some of these questions were designed to get as close to the raw data as possible. I asked questions that aimed to encourage teachers to be analytical in their responses in order to learn about their perspectives in terms of what they said and also what they did not say. The second focus group interview occurred at

the end of the study to gain insight into and clarifications about participants’ feelings, perspectives, and thinking about teaching the curriculum.

Data collection took place in four phases across 3 months. I included multiple sources of data and maintained a systematic organization of the data, which enabled me to address a range of issues connected to my research questions, and to note converging lines of inquiry through the process of triangulation (Yin, 2006). Primary data sources included analysis of curriculum and emerging curricular artifacts, interview transcripts, surveys, teacher journals, researcher journal, and memos. These data helped to ensure that the voices of the participants were represented transparently (Marshall & Rossman,

2011) based on their descriptions, in order to bring to light their reflections and perspectives. To capture a holistic and detailed explanation of the setting, flexibility in the data collection methods to include emergent data was essential for me to allow for adjustments that helped illuminate what happens and why, as described by participants during the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2009).

Researcher Role and Positionality

Banks (2006) emphasized, “the culture, context, and the positionality of researchers influence their assumptions, questions, findings, and interpretations” (p. 780).

This was especially true for this study. I am positioned by several identities that shape my worldview. As a co-designer of the racial-justice curriculum for this study and an African

American teacher in the research site, I was completely immersed in the setting throughout the process of this research. Including myself in this study enabled me to make this work more personal and reflective. Yet, it was necessary to maintain an

awareness of my racial and cultural identities and to reflect on how this influenced the research that included myself as well as others who had their own racialized ways of knowing and experiencing the world (Milner, 2007). Further, I was a colleague of the teachers of this study who had known me for more than a decade through interactions in meetings, the teachers’ lounge, committees, and various other capacities. Also, I am the mother of a daughter who schooled in this same district, and I am the daughter of parents born in the segregated South. Additionally, I am affiliated with professional organizations that focus on issues related to social justice. Therefore, my positionality was not neutral, and I reflected on my subjectivities along with ethical considerations throughout the study (Luttrell, 2010).

Some will argue that this positionality creates tensions in research. Unless spotlighted and actively monitored, my relationship among the teachers of this study and how it affected this research could be viewed as a limitation (Fishman & McCarthy,

2000; Luttrell, 2010). Of particular concern is that the researchers’ identities, experiences, and interests can create biases that preordain the findings of a study. On the other hand, in practitioner research, my position is viewed as a strength in that such closeness to the research site and the teachers narrows the gap between the traditional binary of research and the researched (Toma, 2000). Charmaz (2006) asserted, “Just as the methods we choose influence what we see, what we bring to the study also influences what we can see” (p. 15). As a researcher who was a teacher and colleague of each of the teachers, a co-developer of the curriculum, and a participant, my position was a unique window with which to frame and explore this study. This “duality of roles”—teacher and researcher—enabled me to participate in the inquiry process, as Cochran-Smith and Lytle

(2009) explained, as a “researcher working from the inside” (p. 41). This blended role was an advantage that provided significant insights into teaching (Cochran-Smith &

Lytle, 2009; Lankshear & Knobel, 2004).

However, keeping in mind the tensions that my blended role created, I monitored this dynamic. Past and present interactions with each of the teachers of this study influenced my interpretation of their experiences and shaped the theories I constructed.

Therefore, I maintained a reflexive stance throughout this study to render visible the research process and decisions made (Luttrell, 2010; Marshall & Rossman, 2011). For example, to mitigate the risk that the teachers might have felt concerned about their performance and how they were being perceived and judged, I maintained an open dialogue. Through both verbal and email communications, each teacher had opportunities to express their social, emotional, and professional experiences and concerns during this study. Finally, the teachers had the ability to opt out at any point during this research.

Race and culture are prominent within U.S. society (Ladson-Billings, 2000) and salient within the fabric of my school district. From my perspective, the decisions made in schools often reinforce what Jones (2006) called “just the way it is” practices where unjust social and political challenges are seen as “natural” and “unchangeable” (p. 60).

My goal as an educator is to develop curriculum and instruct in ways that challenge such decisions that have been normalized. I hoped to contribute to the research field by addressing the research questions of this study as well as the following: What methods can teachers employ that help students learn to recognize issues of power and representation and society’s role in reproducing and reinforcing inequalities? How can all teachers address and integrate racial-justice teaching in curriculum?

Research Site and Participants

Research Site

The location site for this study was the Hines Middle School in a northern suburb of New York. This is a predominantly White, affluent suburb located about 30 minutes from Manhattan in New York City. Its self-described liberalism and artsiness is juxtaposed against its homogenous demographic and “small town America” actuality.

For the 2017-2018 school year, the district reported that there were 527 students and 74% of the students were White. In this village, there is one elementary, one middle, and one high school. Class sizes are relatively small compared to those in urban environments and students attending school here typically knew everyone in their grade.This was also the site of my pilot study.

As a teacher in the middle school of this district, I was able to observe and document issues that I had identified and had been concerned about for some time, specifically the avoidance of discussions about race. The 2017-2018 was the first academic school year that the middle school racial-justice courses took place. The idea for these courses emerged out of discussions and work initiated by the Race Matters

Committee of which I co-founded with Reid, one of the teachers of this study. Prior to the courses, Erin, committee member and one of the curriculum developers and teachers of this study, and I created short minilessons we named “Sparks” that we believed could help our colleagues facilitate brief, 15 to 20 minute conversations about race and racism with their students. We defined “Sparks” as brief informational starters designed to

“spark” conversations that are central to students learning about and discussing current

issues of race and racism that extend beyond historical contexts. Topics covered included defining race, understanding the Black Lives Matter movement, and Immigration – undocumented not illegal. An example of one of the “Sparks” developed prior to these courses can be found in Appendix J. We envisioned that these “Sparks” conversations would occur approximately once per month and take place across the content areas as well as in Physical Education, art, and music classes. Our goal was to normalize conversations around race and make them commenplace regardless of teaching discipline as we believed that issues related to race knows no boundaries and is deeply entrenched in society. Although a schedule was created and discussed during middle school team meetings, implementation of “Sparks” was not consistent across the grades, content and specialty areas. Without administrative power to monitor or enforce this work, the initiative fizzled and faded. This experience gave new impetus for educators from the

Race Matters Committee to call for a separate course on discussing race and racism for all students in their middle school.

Participants

The participants for this study were seasoned educators who engaged in social- justice practices and were teaching the racial-justice curriculum in a new course for sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students titled Sparking Courageous Conversations:

Discussing Race and Racism. Participants were teachers who instructed Grades 5 through

12 in the school district of the research site. I was the co-designer of the curriculum and a former seventh grade teacher for this course during the first 6 weeks of the 2017 school year. Two of the participants worked with me to develop the curriculum during the

summer prior to teaching the courses. One participant, a high school teacher who volunteered to teach one of the middle-school courses, made further developments to the curriculum in the fall. I used a recruitment letter to ask if teachers were willing to be participants in this study (see Appendix A). Then, I provided each participant with informed consent procedures, including a description of the research and participant’s rights (see Appendix B).

In the following sections, I introduce the three teachers who participated in the pilot study. I used pseudonyms and masked details to protect the confidentiality of the three teachers and any students they discussed.

Erin. Erin is in her mid-40s and on a demographics survey (see Appendix I), she identified as White and female. She began teaching directly after college, in her early

20s. At the time of the study, she had taught for 17 years in this school site, taking two

3-year absences during her career for parental leave. Erin taught several sections of eighth grade English. During the pilot for this study, 26 students were in her Sparking

Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism course; 24 students identified as White and two identified as Asian. As the main eighth grade English teacher in this school who taught the majority of the students, Erin knew many of the students in her

Race and Racism course because they were also her English students. Erin and I developed the majority of the curriculum the summer prior to her teaching the course.

Erin is an active member of the Race Matters Committee in the school district.

Jamie. Jamie is in her mid-40s and began teaching in her 20s in the New York

City school system for 5 years before working at the Hines Middle School. On a demographics survey (see Appendix I), she identified as Hispanic and female and had

taught in the district for 19 years. Jamie is an English Language Learner (ELL) teacher in the district. Although she primarily works with middle- and high-school students, she has taught across all grade levels in the district. During the pilot for this study, Jamie had 25 students in her sixth grade section of the Sparking Courageous Conversations:

Discussing Race and Racism course. Twenty students identified as White, two students identified as Hispanic, one student identified as biracial, one student identified as Black, and one student identified as Asian. Many students had not met or known Jamie because she worked primarily with small groups of ELL students. Jamie worked with Erin and me over the summer on developing the curriculum for the course. Jamie has a Bachelor's degree, three Master’s degrees, and her administrative license, and was currently a doctoral student. She is an active member of the Race Matters Committee in the school district.

Reid. Reid is in his late 40s and on the demographics survey (see Appendix I), he identified as White and male. He is a high-school English teacher who had been teaching in the district for 22 years. Reid had developed curriculum and been teaching a popular high-school elective course titled Race and Gender for the past 10 years. Reid is the co- founder of the Race Matters Committee. We had also worked together in the past on a district committee that focused on diversity. At the time of the pilot for this study, I had taught this course for 6 weeks before Reid stepped in. There were 24 students in the seventh grade section of the Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and

Racism Course. Twenty students identified as White, two students identified as Asian, one student identified as Indian and Muslim, and one student identified as Hispanic.

Sonja. Finally, I was also a participant in this study as one of the co-designers of the curriculum and having taught the curriculum for the first 6 weeks of the school year. I was also one of the sixth grade language arts teachers at the research site. On a demographics survey (see Appendix I), I identified as African American and female and had taught in the district for 19 years. I was fully immersed in the setting and this research was steeped in “both the researcher’s and the participants’ worldviews”

(Marshall & Rossman, 2011, p. 93). At times, I have been the only or one of two or three

African American teachers in the entire school district. The dynamic that existed between my colleagues and me was integral to the research and required continuous monitoring and reflecting. Milner (2007) argued for the importance of “researchers’ engaging in racially and culturally grounded questions about themselves” (p. 395). He posited,

“Engaging in these questions can bring to researchers’ awareness and consciousness known (seen), unknown (unseen), and unanticipated (unforeseen) issues, perspectives, epistemologies, and positions” (p. 395). Therefore, I reflected on my racialized and culturally ways of knowing in my researcher journal throughout this study by responding to questions such as: “In what ways do my racial and cultural backgrounds influence how

I experience the world, what I emphasize in my research, and how I evaluate and interpret others and their experiences? How do I know?” (p. 395).

Toma (2000) argued that strong connections and close involvement between researchers and participants “allow for rich description of contexts and experiences that are the essence of good qualitative data” (p. 177). This study was, in essence, a partnership where the researcher’s values and close relationships with participants inevitably influenced the research (Lincoln & Guba, 2008; Toma, 2000). As a subjective

researcher, therefore, it was inconceivable to separate myself from the research and the teachers who participated in this study. Bias and involvement were unavoidable and ultimately allowed for collaborative work between me and participants as we partnered to

“determine meaning, generate findings, and reach conclusions” (Toma, 2000, p. 177).

Subsequently, this close relationship between researcher and participants strengthened the study and yielded rich, qualitative data.

Pilot Study

The pilot study was helpful in two main ways. First, it supported my rationale and argument for the study. While it had been my experience that middle-school curriculum leaves little room for racial-justice work, the participants who taught different grade levels and disciplines also expressed their concerns about the silences in the curriculum when it came to issues related to race and racism. The teachers of this study could only name one or two curriculum units in the entire middle school where, to their knowledge, race was addressed, and they felt that it was done so in a limited fashion. Each of their responses to open-ended questions reflected their beliefs that middle-school students’ knowledge about race and racism were limited. The second benefit of the pilot study was that it enabled me to try out the methods and strategies of the study. These methods were employed to gain understandings of experiences, as described by teachers, of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum. As a result of the pilot, I proposed several revisions that I believed would help to both refine the study and provide additional data to help me better understand participants’ experiences and interpretations.

The design of this research was informed by the pilot study that occurred over the course of 2-weeks. Data collection instruments included existing data, which consisted of the racial-justice curriculum (see Appendix C), and new data including emerging artifacts such as curricular materials, individual interviews, focus group interviews, and written reflections including analytical memos and field notes in participant and researcher journals. A discussion of each data collection instrument, its piloting, what was learned from its piloting, and changes made to this study as a result of piloting follows.

Table 1

Data Collection Instruments, Procedures, Research Questions

Frequency/ Phase Instrument Procedure/Method Research Question(s) Duration

1 Racial- justice 12 days/8 hours Teachers met to A. As teachers reflect on curriculum per day develop racial-justice and describe the process of and teachers’ curriculum developing and teaching journals racial-justice curriculum, what do they report they have learned?

2 Individual One 20-minute Conducted open- A. interviews, interview for each ended, in-depth, semi- journals, memos participant structured individual B. What challenges do the interviews teachers encounter when teaching race in a predominantly White, affluent middle school?

C. How do teachers respond to these challenges?

3 Focus group One 30-minute Conducted open- A, B, C interview, focus group ended, in-depth, semi- journals, interview structured focus group memos interview

4 Demographics One 15-minute Emailed survey of 8 A, B, C survey survey per short questions participant (race/ethnicity, age, etc.)

Phase 1: Racial-Justice Curriculum

Existing data for this study included the racial-justice curriculum (see Appendix

C) developed by participants for three new courses at their middle school titled: Sparking

Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism. The curriculum was designed for 9 weeks of instruction. The courses occurred four times (once per quarter) for each grade level across the school year. With few exceptions, each sixth, seventh, and eighth grade student was scheduled for this course. Teachers maintained journals during the writing and teaching of the curriculum as a way to reflect on their experiences. These notebooks were utilized during the individual and focus group interviews. They often jogged participants’ memories about ideas, issues, and events and helped bring their perspectives to light. The curriculum provided insight into participants’ ideas about what the racial-justice curriculum is and what lessons were important for predominantly White, affluent middle-school students in sixth, seventh, and eighth grades.

My analysis of the racial-justice curriculum involved examining the lessons, sequence of instruction, and activities that each of the teachers believed was essential for students to acquire in order to gain more nuanced understandings about race and racism within the specific, local context of their school and community. I explored how teachers engaged tenets of critical literacy to develop the racial-justice curriculum as well as any new emerging categories and themes. Phase 1 was ongoing throughout the study.

Analysis of the curriculum occurred simultaneously in order to inform the interview protocols and follow-up questions.

Pilot. Erin, Jamie, and Sonja met for 12 non-consecutive days in August 2017 prior to the start of the school year to discuss and develop the curriculum. Additionally, they each spent 6-8 hours independently researching and locating accompanying texts and other materials for the lessons of the curriculum. They proposed the following topics and sequence of lessons for the curriculum: Exploring Identities and Labels; What is

Race?; Privilege, Supremacy, and Becoming an Ally; Immigration: The Struggle for

Entrance and Acceptance; Stereotypes and Visibility; Colorblindness; and Symbols of

Hate and Racism. Each lesson spanned 1 or 2 days of the 80-minute course that met every other day of the school week. After moving through the lessons, each of the teachers planned for students to engage in group projects titled in the curriculum: Racial

Justice Projects: Looking Through the Lens of Race. Group projects spanned 6-9 days as students researched, read, and collected information to create a project that provided insight into students’ understandings about race and racism as a result of the curriculum.

Some of the topics students explored included: representations of race in literature and media; environmental racism; immigration policies in the United States; police brutality; and Confederate monuments. As I read and analyzed the curriculum, I made several notes and memos. I used these notations to generate codes such as talking about race, defining racism, and understanding privilege that I condensed into themes relating to critical literacy. Examples are: disrupting the status quo, deconstructing ideas about race, and taking action.

Changes to the study. Because the racial-justice curriculum was existing data, the changes I made related to this curriculum occured in the interview protocols, which were part of the new data for this study.

The teachers each expressed both satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the curriculum they had developed. For example, all of the teachers felt beginning the course with a discussion of identities and labels was a powerful way to help students understand how identities are socially and historically constructed; that positive and negative connotations can be attached to identities; and that labels can be used to both understand and judge people. However, each of the teachers reflected on the challenges for many students to articulate more than two or three identities for themselves. Specifically, there were hesitations in the categories of race and religion. In response to this challenge, the teachers described changing their plans for this lesson to invite students to discuss their identities with parents/guardians at home and to complete part of the activities of this lesson with their guidance. Therefore, a change made to this study was that I asked each of the teachers to bring artifacts to the individual and focus group interviews in order to shed light on the ways they had revised the curriculum. This emerging data helped me to understand some of the challenges the teachers described, the similarities and differences among these challenges, and how they addressed the challenges they faced.

Another issue noted was the sequence of the curriculum. While some participants felt the layout of the curriculum worked well, others felt differently. For example, Erin felt strongly that her eighth grade students needed the “Symbols of Hate and Racism” lesson much earlier than what was planned. Her beliefs stemmed from the events of

Charlottesville, Virginia in August 2017, occurring just weeks prior to the school year; thus, this lesson was relevant more immediately. The teachers expressed the need for each of them to consider the scope and sequence of the curriculum as flexible, based on the specific students before them and any particular circumstances that might require

adaptations in the order or lessons. Also, the teachers experienced challenges teaching the entirety of some of the lesson in 1 or 2 days as planned when the curriculum was written.

In response to this challenge, they noted the need for flexibility in the time span for lessons and in determining which activities within a lesson were utilized or skipped. A change to the study in response to this was to invite each participant during individual interviews to reorder the lessons from the racial-justice curriculum in terms of importance and when they believed the lessons should be taught. I then looked across each of the teachers’ ideas to determine similarities and differences. Additionally, I discussed these observations with the teachers during a focus group interview to gain further understandings from the collective meaning-making of their curriculum and instruction decisions.

Finally, although each of the teachers felt that students were thoroughly engaged in the racial-justice projects and were utilizing instruction from lessons of the curriculum to support their work, it was difficult for students to access and obtain some of the research materials they needed. For example, Jamie reported that her sixth grade students experienced challenges obtaining research written for their grade level. I also experienced challenges locating some research documents with students looking to explore the issue of environmental racism by learning about the 2017 impact of Hurricane Maria on Puerto

Rico. To account for these challenges, teachers implemented several strategies such as creating a GoogleDoc where articles, video clips, and other texts were co-collected by teachers and students and then shared among them. Further, teachers reported using their social studies and science colleagues, as well as the librarian, to gather resources for the racial-justice projects. A change to the study in response to this included utilizing the

interview protocols to determine where teachers turned for resources and what they believed were the best sources for engaging students in instruction about race and racism.

Phase 2: Individual Interviews of Focal Participants

I conducted one open-ended, in-depth, semi-structured individual interview with each teacher to investigate his or her experiences developing and teaching the racial- justice curriculum and to understand his or her perspectives. Interviews occurred in my classroom or the teachers’ classrooms during common non-teaching times including lunch. The duration of each interview was 20 minutes and I asked participants 8-10 questions. I made several follow-up prompts in response to their comments to elicit additional details in order to gain a deeper understanding of the participants’ ideas and experiences.

Pilot. During the pilot study, an example of an interview question included, “How has race been discussed in this school prior to these courses?” Erin had this to say.

I just don’t think it’s something that is purposefully thought about here. I mean, when it connects to work that teachers consider their curriculum then yes, I think it is discussed. But narrowly, only as it relates to the work and if students have more to say. It’s an uncomfortable topic for many of us, me too […] People tend to avoid what makes them feel uncertain and uncomfortable.

A follow-up prompt included, “Tell me a circumstance when race might connect to work teachers consider their curriculum.” Erin noted the following:

Well […] I mean, I can use myself as an example. Before, when I first started teaching in my twenties, I just […] it came up when I taught the novel To Kill a Mockingbird. In order to really delve into this text, we had to talk about race and how Tom Robinson is treated and why […] the conditions for African Americans. But I didn’t really connect this to the present. But for the past ten years, I’ve built a social justice unit around this text that does examine life today, the injustices, the issues that have persisted around race.

Another follow-up prompt included, “When you think of the type of racial-justice instruction you would like to see happening in school, what comes to mind?” Erin explained:

I’d like to see it immersed in everything we do. Not just during the reading of a particular novel, or […] during one unit or time of year like Black History Month. It would threaded through the curriculum in all of the classes. Teachers and students would be able to have conversations that become easier over time.

Analysis of individual interviews. When Erin explained that she believed race was not “something that is purposefully thought about here,” this demonstrated a lack of consciousness she believed her colleagues have about the importance of race, and that perhaps it is unnecessary to address it in the curriculum or in a school of predominantly

White students. Erin discussed making a change in her teaching practice herself—from not purposefully including race in her curriculum to constructing a unit that extends the teaching of race and other social justice issues. She envisioned the instruction of racial justice as work that is done all throughout the year and not in a limited capacity. I noted the code “disrupting the status quo” on this transcript as Erin was seeking to interrupt the common practice of avoiding issues related to race and engage in the reconstruction of curriculum that challenges dominant practices (Jones, 2006). This code emerged across the transcripts of each teacher.

Some of the teachers discussed examples of ways they tried to engage their colleagues in including race in instruction. For example, Jamie organized a multicultural book fair in the school district and secured funding from various sources in the school community to bring in authors and illustrators of color to provide workshops for students during the fair. I discussed my role as co-founder of the Race Matters Committee and

how I hoped it would be a resource for all educators in the district to reimagine curriculum. Reid created a GoogleDoc that gave an overview of the Syrian Crisis and shared it with all of his colleagues in the district, Grades K-12. He provided his rationale for taking this action:

You know the [...] with everything going on with the Syrian Crisis, it is important that we have information to dispel stereotypes and misconceptions that have surfaced after 9/11 and as a result of this current administration. Stereotypes and discrimination cause students to be misinformed and unsafe. I know that these types of conversations can be difficult and uncomfortable, but we just have to have them.

Some of the teachers’ actions demonstrated the ways they felt compelled to disrupt silences around race not only with their students, but with their colleagues.

Changes to the study. Erin’s responses, though rich with information, demonstrated several gaps that may have been avoided with a stronger framing of questions. For example, several follow-up prompts were necessary to gain clearer insight into Erin’s perspectives and experiences in her school and the existing curriculum.

Further, it was unclear what caused Erin to make a change from the beginning of her teaching to the present in terms of addressing issues of race in her curriculum. Therefore, the change made to address this issue was that I revised the interview protocol to include more grand-tour and mini-tour type questions that might elicit longer utterances from the teachers. For example, “Can you describe what it would look like if racial-justice instruction was included in curriculum throughout the entire school and across the content areas?” This provided additional details that informed my analysis. Also, I increased the frequency, time span, and number of questions to two, approximately 60- minute individual interviews per teacher, with 15 questions for each interview in order to

gain a stronger understanding of the perspectives of participants (see Appendices D and

E). Phase 2 was also ongoing throughout the study.

Phase 3: Focus Group Interview

I conducted one 30-minute focus group interview with participants. I asked participants five open-ended, semi-structured questions and made several follow-up prompts. During this focus group interview, I facilitated a discussion with the teachers about the teaching of the curriculum they developed and explored their understandings and interpretations of their courses. I also engaged in this discussion as one of the curriculum developers and teachers of the course. The focus group interview enabled me to observe the verbal and nonverbal interactions among participants. Memos made in my researcher journal helped me to capture descriptions of my observations during the group interview. As Marshall and Rossman (2011) asserted, “The strengths of focus group interviews are that this method is socially oriented, studying participants in an atmosphere more natural than artificial experimental circumstances and more relaxed than a one-to-one interview” (p. 149).

The focus group interview provided insight into the lived experiences of each teacher as he or she constructed new meanings together through discussion of their distinct and also comparable experiences. Such data, Marshall and Rossman (2011) further notes, can yield important insight into participants’ perspectives.

Pilot. The following is an excerpt from the focus group interview followed by a memo of my observations:

Sonja: One of the issues raised in the research on teaching race and racism is that some educators believe this isn’t needed for White students nor is it

important in their lives. In what ways did you observe that students were invested in this curriculum? Reid: I think many of the essays and vignettes we included in the curriculum pulled students into having tough discussions. They were moved by the stories of real people. Jamie: Yes! My students went on and on about the vignettes by people dealing with immigration issues. Especially, you know, the kids. When kids read about kids, they have a different reaction. It’s like what they read is happening to them. And they care. Erin: Also, I think the political landscape we’re in right now is such that kids are bombarded with examples of racism every […] each time they listen to the news or read an article. We’re really, as educators, being negligent not to talk about it. Reid: And kids, especially middle-school students, I’m seeing, really want to talk about it. I see a real difference between them and my high school students. They’re very invested. They want to know and to do something. They couldn’t wait for the Racial Justice Projects. They kept saying, “Finally we’re at the part of the class where we do something about this!” Erin: [...] Well, I’m not having the same experience, I think, with my eighth graders. This has been a quiet group. And when they speak, it’s mostly to challenge what I’m teaching. There’s a real resistance there and I know I’ve talked about this before. They are consistently reluctant to see very clear events and issues as racism. It’s been […] really hard.

My researcher journal included several field notes (see Appendix H) about this particular exchange. After the focus group discussion, I made the following memo:

Erin began to shake her head from side to side when Reid and Jamie began to talk about their students’ positive reactions to the curriculum. Erin looked down and sighed before explaining her experience. She appeared, perhaps to be self- conscious or embarrassed about how her course went. She continually expressed doubts. She questioned her teaching and was frustrated by her students’ lack of engagement. Reid and Jamie uttered what seemed to be reassurances that were not completely audible (“It’s not you,” “You have a tough group”). At one point, Reid pats Erin on her back. Erin’s teacher journal includes a note the demonstrates her frustration during a lesson on privilege: “Why do the [they] see it with gender but not race?”

Analysis of focus group interview. I created the codes “privileging the lives of others” and “resistance” based on this excerpt from the group discussion and other parts of the interview. Reid and Jamie demonstrated that their students placed value in

centering the lived experiences of those different from themselves. From their perspective, students were willing to engage in challenging conversations about race and how race impacts the lives of many. Reid and Jamie described their students as invested in reading about the current experiences of people and their challenges as a result of racism in society. Erin, however, demonstrated that she was not seeing the same results that her colleagues were experiencing. I noted in a memo that both Reid and Jamie made statements and gestures in what I interpreted as attempts to reassure Erin that her teaching abilities were not to blame for these results. They seemed to sense, as did I, that Erin was feeling vulnerable about her teaching, even though she had not actually articulated this.

Changes to the study. I made two specific changes to strengthen the focus group interview protocol. First, similar to the changes for the individual interviews, I increased the frequency and time span. I conducted two 60-minute focus group interviews for this study (see Appendices F and G). This enabled me to facilitate a group discussion about the development of the curriculum, which did not emerge in this focus group pilot. The first of the two focus group interviews occurred at the beginning of the study, and the second occurred at the end of the study. Due to the 30-minute time constraint for the pilot focus group discussion, many ideas were launched but underdeveloped or not addressed.

For example, although a seasoned teacher who is widely admired by her colleagues, Erin seemed to be expressing the ways in which teaching the curriculum challenged her perception of herself as a good teacher. This notion was not explored. Therefore, the second change I made was to construct more open-ended exploration questions that spotlighted participants’ feelings about themselves as teachers of the curriculum and provided opportunities for them to offer additional thoughts on a topic. For example, one

question I included based on the pilot and Erin’s response was: “Can you give me three words that describe your feelings teaching this course?” and “Can you tell me about these words and how they demonstrate the feelings you experienced when teaching this course?” Additionally, I asked these questions during the individual interviews to mitigate any feelings of embarrassment or insecurities. Also, as a result of this pilot study, I provided more opportunities for participants to build off of one another’s ideas, comments, and reactions and to be more analytical in how they described their experiences throughout the focus group interview.

Phase 4: Demographics Survey

I emailed each teacher at the end of the pilot study and asked them to complete a short demographics survey (see Appendix I). The information collected on this survey included: race/ethnicity, age, highest level of education, religious affiliation, and so on.

This information helped me to determine the factors that might influence each of the teachers’ thoughts and opinions expressed in responses to the interview questions.

Pilot. When asked to order specific concepts that were part of the racial-justice curriculum in terms of importance to the teachers, Erin and Reid named the issue of privilege as fifth and fourth, respectively, while Jamie listed it second. When the teachers were asked about their ideas, the following exchange occurred between Reid and Jamie:

Reid: We just can do this right away. Jamie: Why not? I think it’s too late the way we have it. The kids need to understand this sooner. Reid: I agree but- Jamie: So you think we should make them comfortable first so it’s palatable?

Analysis of demographics survey. Both Reid and Erin identified as White and

Jamie identified as Hispanic on the demographics survey. I sensed Reid and Erin’s hesitation about discussions of White privilege in what they felt would be “too soon” in the curriculum. Jamie, however, disagreed and seemed to be frustrated by the idea of waiting. To me, it seemed that the teachers’ racial identities influenced their thinking about the order of the curriculum, particularly around a topic that might be most challenging for their White students, and perhaps for the White teachers.

Changes to the study. In response to the exchange between Reid and Erin and the demographic information each of the teachers had included on the survey, I included a question in the individual interviews. I asked participants: “Can you give an example of where one or more of your identities may have influenced your teaching?” I used this information to compare how responses, curriculum, and teaching varied between participants.

Overall analysis of the pilot study. The analysis of the pilot for this study revealed a variety of codes related to critical literacy such as consciousness-raising, perspectives, and social action. These codes were revealed in the racial-justice curriculum as well as in the teaching of the curriculum and students’ reactions as described by the teachers. The analysis also revealed gaps and patterns in the teachers’ curriculum development and instructional experiences. One teacher expressed experiencing great resistance from students in her courses; other teachers described students who were engaged and invested. As a result, I focused subsequent analysis on ways each of the

teachers were moved to revise or discard part of the curriculum based on their distinct classroom experiences. During this process, I utilized memos and conversations about the data with the participants to solidify my thinking about the categories and themes.

I engaged these processes to strengthen the usefulness, credibility, and originality of the findings (Charmaz, 2006) as I listened to participants’ voices in order to gain insight into how teachers developed and taught the racial-justice curriculum.

Methods of Data Analysis

This section describes how the data collected were examined to arrive at findings that addressed the research questions for the study. Data collection and data analysis were iterative and ongoing throughout this study and, at times, occurred simultaneously.

Simultaneous data collection and analysis provided quick interpretations of some of the data in order to inform and influence methodological decisions (Marshall & Rossman,

2011; Merriam & Tisdell, 2009; Yin, 2006). The process of data analysis, as described by

Lankshear and Knobel (2004), involved organizing pieces of information “systematically identifying their key features or relationships (themes, concepts, beliefs, etc.) and interpreting them” (p. 266). Formal and informal data analysis was ongoing and iterative, enhancing the quality of my analyses and interpretations.

First Level of Analysis

The first level of analysis began early in the study to manage and organize the data as well as inform the study. The teachers wrote field notes in their teacher journals to

record their thinking about and experiences with the curriculum and instruction. As I read the curriculum, teacher journals, and my researcher journal and memos, I marked notes, comments, observations, and questions in the margins. Then, I studied participants’ field notes from their teacher journals to look for patterns and themes. Individual interviews were used to understand each of the teacher’s own interpretations of themes that were emerging. I conducted focus group interviews to explore the participants’ collective construction of ideas and beliefs. Each interview was audio recorded and transcribed.

Additionally, I took field notes (Marshall & Rossman, 2011) to capture descriptions of my observations during interviews and used these notes to write analytical memos.

Informal data analysis occurred during follow-up meetings when I discussed data and shared memos. Because I believe that self-inquiry research can be a lens through which to learn deeply about teaching and learning, I also explored my own thinking and experiences as a co-developer of the curriculum and a practitioner. I engaged my own field notes from my teacher journal and responded to interview questions in my researcher journal. Taking an inquiry stance toward my work resulted in what Cochran-

Smith and Lytle (1993) described as the evolution of a knowledge base for teaching. All data were logged by date, type, and teachers’ pseudonyms during each phase of data collection. To maintain a high level of organization, I stored and categorized data digitally.

Second Level of Analysis

In the second level of analysis, I used the constant comparative method for each teacher, which consisted of coding each interview and then doing a cross-interview

analysis (Charmaz, 2006). During this process, I took into account institutional, social, personal, and professional factors such as each teacher’s race, ethnicity, and educational experiences. From there, I collapsed these codes into focused codes. Focused coding helped me to further recognize and explore emerging themes across the interviews related to curriculum and teaching about race and racism (Charmaz, 2006).

Third Level of Analysis

In the third level of analysis, I used theory-generated codes (Marshall & Rossman,

2011) by drawing upon tenets and layers of critical theory (Jones, 2006). I collapsed and refined common themes that were emerging across data sources that were specific to the participants’ teaching. As the process of data analysis is informed by theory (Lankshear

& Knobel, 2004; Marshall & Rossman, 2011), I created charts (Table 2) to organize the data emerging within these tenets and their relationship to the research questions. Some of the categories included “deconstruction,” “taking action,” and “power.” During subsequent analyses, I created codes for new emerging categories such as “exposing blindspots” and “resistance from students and colleagues,” and remained alert for further unanticipated categories. Some of the findings of this study included: developing a consciousness about race during K-12 schooling, two main types of revisions made to the curriculum, the usefulness of digital texts, and facilitation methods that support the teaching about race and racism with predominantly White students.

Table 2

Theory-Generated and In Vivo Codes

Analytical Memos

Throughout data analysis, I wrote analytical memos about the patterns and themes

I saw or did not see emerging (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). These memos enabled me to document the questions I generated, identify gaps in the data, and consider the ways that educational and social science research literature does or does not lend meaning to emerging data. I wrote analytic memos throughout each level of analysis in order to revisit the data, return to the research questions, and “search for alternate understandings”

(Marshall & Rossman, 2010, p. 209).

In order to triangulate what the teachers were learning and how they navigated issues and challenges in their teaching, data analysis included a continuous process of examining how the teachers were describing their experiences, what they explained they

were doing, and which artifacts they were developing and using. I engaged a “continual cycle of questioning, observing, and acting” (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009, p. 122) to make visible the experiences described by the teachers. This was a spiraling and expanding process, which only became obvious after a period of systematic interpretative inquiry.

Reliability and Trustworthiness

Validity, as put forth by Luttrell (2010), is how qualitative researchers “make explicit” their methods and criteria for determining if their findings are “sound, well- grounded, and justifiable” (p. 162). I used the following criteria to check the reliability and trustworthiness of this research.

Prolonged Engagement and Consistent Observation

As a researcher, practitioner, and close colleague of the teachers in this study. I sustained my engagement through frequent contact with them to understand the dynamics of developing and teaching the racial-justice curriculum. Consistent communication with each of the teachers through phone calls, text messages, emails, and informal meetings provided a more complete understanding of their perspectives and experiences and allowed me to test out developing theories and rule out unsubstantiated assumptions

(Lincoln & Guba, 2011).

Multiple Data Sources

Multiple data sources, as asserted by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2010), “illuminate and confirm, but also disconfirm one another” (p. 44). Individual and focus group

interviews were conducted to understand the perspectives of each teacher and to provide them with opportunities to revise or add to data collection and analysis. Interviews were used to cross-check and refine the accuracy of my field notes and observations. In addition to documenting observations through detailed and descriptive field notes and writing analytical memos, I kept a researcher journal. Journaling throughout the study enabled me to engage in reflexive practices (Marshall & Rossman, 2006), such as reflecting on data, reviewing and revising the research questions, and making biases visible. Long-term involvement and a wide variety of data collected were employed throughout this study to reveal a complete description of the setting (Lincoln & Guba,

2011).

Bias

By keeping a research journal, I made visible assumptions and biases that developed during the study. Journaling was one way to confront my “contradictory identities” (Villenas, 2010, p. 348) as an African American researcher and teacher and the inherent investment I have in this work. Researcher bias was addressed through continual reflection of my subjectivities, changes in views over time, and dilemmas. Further, anticipating the particular types of bias that may exist in this study helped me to triangulate data and refine methods more effectively.

Critical Friends

Seeing my work through the eyes of a critical friend helped me to determine whether my methods were transparent and if my inferences and interpretations were sound (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). I monitored my analyses of data through critical and

reflective discussions with peers who were both familiar with critical literacy practices and those who were not in order to illuminate gaps and misunderstandings.

Presentation of Findings

The findings of this study are presented in Chapters IV, V, and VI. These chapters were not designed to address each of the research questions separately. In Chapter IV, I analyze the findings of the study as related to the sociocultural backgrounds of each teacher and the ways these have influenced their ideas about racial-justice curriculum. In

Chapter V, I focus on the reflections of each teacher about the racial-justice curriculum they developed. Chapter VI addressses the findings around the teachers’ experiences in teaching their courses. I use excerpts from the individual and focus group interview data to support the findings that emerged during data analysis. I include connections to existing research literature and provide theoretical and methodological insights gained through an analysis of the findings. In Chapter VII, I position this study’s findings within broader discussions of teaching about race and racism in a predominantly White middle school. I highlight the implications of the findings for educational policy, teacher practice, elementary and secondary school curriculum, and educational and social science research.

I will share the findings of this study with educational and social science researchers, educators, policymakers, youth, families, and communities through public presentations, publication in academic journals and the popular press, and presentations at professional conferences of organizations such as the American Educational Research

Association, National Council of Teachers of English, and International Literacy

Association.

Limitations and Ethical Considerations

A methodological limitation of this study was the lack of prior research studies on teaching racial-justice curriculum in predominantly White, affluent, suburban contexts.

Reviewing prior research helps researchers to lay a foundation for understanding the questions they are investigating. This limitation points to the importance of further research in this area. Subsequently, I broadened my scope and included a variety of studies that were available around topics that helped to inform my study.

A second limitation of this study involved ethical considerations regarding the students of the participants. Specifically, critical literacy practices involve teaching in ways that challenge the dominant values within society: those of the White affluent and middle class. Students in the research site may have experienced the privileging of these values for most, if not all, of their schooling. As a result of the curriculum taught in this study, students grappled with judging their family and community members from perspectives they had not previously considered. Such realization of mainstream, taken- for-granted perspectives, and deconstruction of dominant discourses caused some students to experience discomfort. However, the teachers of this study were seasoned teachers who were able to make on-the-spot decisions throughout this study. Further, when working with a teacher who knows and cares for the students—namely, the teachers in this study, critical literacy practices “helps to break this silence as it opens up

spaces for mainstream and marginalized perspectives to be considered in the name of social justice” (Jones, 2006, p. 67).

A third limitation involved the structure of the Sparking Courageous

Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism courses. Each 10-week quarter, teachers had a different group of students to work with from their grade level. As such, there was limited flexibility to delve further into or linger over specific topics. The time constraints of this course limited students’ development as critical thinkers about race, particularly as many were new to exploring the experiences and perspectives of others different from themselves. However, since the courses were designed to spiral across the middle-school grades each year, students will have additional opportunities for growth and development. This study aimed to provide insight into what is possible when teachers take on curriculum instruction about race with predominantly White students.

Conclusion

The questions and methods used for a study influence all aspects of a study. This includes the researcher, the participants, the data that emerge, and the analysis of these data (Luttrell, 2010). Therefore, the methodology I employed included continuous reflection of how I was studying teaching, ways that my role as participant and researcher complicated the study, as well how my assumptions influenced this research.

Chapter IV

SOCIOCULTURAL PORTRAITS OF TEACHERS:

REFLECTIONS ON RACE AND CONSTRUCTIONS OF

RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM

Lift every voice and sing Till earth and heaven ring, Ring with the harmonies of Liberty; Let our rejoicing rise High as the listening skies, Let it resound loud as the rolling sea. Sing a song full of the faith that the dark past has taught us, Sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us, Facing the rising sun of our new day begun Let us march on till victory is won. “Lift Every Voice and Sing” Words by James Weldon Johnson Music by John Rosamond Johnson

I can’t remember the day that the lyrics and music of The Black National Anthem were etched into my heart. It seems as if my Black and Brown peers and I were born knowing the words. Our churches and families made sure we did. So did our schools.

Each day in middle school began with the Pledge of Allegiance followed by the first verse of our anthem. During school assemblies and at graduation, we sang the entire song. Our collective voices dipped and soared as directed by Mr. Prescott, our Black,

Caribbean music teacher. My peers and I exchanged looks of doubt that we’d be able to

recall the words to the last two seldom-sung verses, surprising ourselves each time that we could. Each time I sang, my heart swelled.

These formative years in middle school were about much more than educating me across the content areas. My Black teachers and their practices shielded me from a world

I didn’t realize despised me. Inside my school, I was filled with both a strong sense of national and cultural pride. My teachers told me regularly that I was gifted and talented.

And I believed them. Our African American principal, Ms. Boyce, had high expectations of us, which were made clear when she regularly reminded us of her favorite bible verse from Luke 12:48 that became our school motto: “To whom much is given, much is required.”

It was in middle school where I learned the phrase Black is beautiful and how these words became a source of power, a movement from within the Civil Rights

Movement. Black is beautiful was more than an affirmation and radical declaration to ward off internalized racism. It was, for me, a normalized way of being inside the walls of my school community that created a protective armor I didn’t realize I’d need until years later.

I share this because of the myriad ways I draw upon my own background as an educator. This includes the choices I’ve made in the development and teaching of the racial-justice curriculum, as well as my decisions as researcher and writer of this dissertation. I wondered if this was unique to me or whether it holds true for all of the teachers in this study.

In the following sections, I share three key findings about the sociocultural background of each of the teachers. This includes the ways in which they each developed

a consciousness about race during K-12 schooling, their perceptions around discussing race in their K-12 school district, and their constructions of definitions of racial-justice curriculum. First, I discuss the schooling and backgrounds of each of the teachers and how this influenced some of the decisions they made when developing and teaching their courses on racial justice. Next, I discuss their reflections on how race is addressed in their school district. Finally, I share each teacher’s ideas about defining racial-justice curriculum. I discuss how the sociocultural background of each of the teachers and their individual and collective perceptions about race in their school district contributed to their insights about what a racial-justice curriculum entails.

Sociocultural Backgrounds of Teachers and Their Willingness to Teach About Race

In conducting the research for this study, exploring the sociocultural backgrounds, including the K-12 educational experiences of each of the teachers, provided insights into the experiences and approaches that led them to develop and teach a racial-justice curriculum for predominantly White, middle-school students. Each teacher has a different sociocultural background and life story, which mattered in different ways in terms of their ideas about developing and teaching the racial-justice curriculum. I examined the data to determine to what extent the sociocultural background of each teacher plays into their willingness to do this work. This line of inquiry provided a clearer picture of the ways that the prior experiences of each of the teachers informed the curriculum they developed and what they each believed were the best practices to implement with students when teaching about race and racism. Specifically, this provided insight into the following interrelated questions: Who are the teachers who take up this work? How do

each of their identities influence their teaching? What brought them to this work of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum? Exploring these questions as I examined the reflections of each of the teachers led to the following findings discussed in this chapter: developing a consciousness about race, discussing race in K-12 schooling, and constructing definitions of racial-justice curriculum.

As a participant in this study, I also asked these questions of myself in order to explore my own insights that I brought to this research (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009;

Lankshear & Knobel, 2004). Throughout this study, I have continuously examined my three identities: co-developer of the curriculum, implementer of the curriculum, and researcher. Writings from my researcher journal helped me to interrogate these identities

(Smith, 1993). In navigating and negotiating my roles as teacher and researcher, I also reflected on What has brought me to this work as a teacher and a researcher?

To disrupt silences about race in their school district, the teachers developed racial-justice curriculum for a 10-week course that was taught at the middle-school level with sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students beginning in the 2017-2018 school year.

During each of the four quarters of the school year, we worked with a different group of approximately 20-25 students. The following chart provides a brief overview of each of the teachers of this study. It includes our self-reported identity markers, our teaching roles in the school district, who was involved in the initial development of the racial- justice curriculum, and the length of time we each taught the racial-justice courses during the 2017-2018 school year.

100

Table 3

Overview of the Teachers and Their Development and Teaching of the Racial-Justice Curriculum

Developer Racial-Justice Course Facilitator Content of Initial Identities 2017-2018 School Year Teachers Area/Grade Racial- (Self-Reported) Each of the Four Quarters Levels Justice and Grade Level Curriculum ELA/8th Erin White; Female Yes Each Quarter; 8th Grade Grade ELL/6th-8th Jamie Hispanic; Female Yes Each Quarter; 6th Grade Grades English/9th- Reid White; Male No 3 Quarters; 7th Grade 12th Grades African ELA/6th Sonja Yes 1 Quarter; 7th Grade American; Female Grade

Erin: “We’re all on the same journey”

Erin discussed attending a small Catholic school for Grades K-8 with the same 40

students from her suburban neighborhood. She made the choice to attend high school in

the city rather than stay local.

I wanted to be in a bigger pond. I wanted to break out of that little box and experience something new.

I asked Erin to say more about what it meant to her to “break out of that little box” and

she described the difference in school size—from a small, suburban environment to a

larger, urban environment—as well as her interest in schooling in a racially-diverse

environment.

It was much more racially diverse too. I’d say a third of the students were white, a third were African American, and a third of the students were Hispanic. It was a fairly even split, not very many Asian students at all, but it was still far more diverse than I had grown up around.

101

As an adolescent, Erin read society and analyzed her lived reality. A consciousness of race was shown when Erin reflected on her understanding, as a middle schooler, of the ways in which her suburban upbringing shielded her from racial diversity. Further, she recalled her intrinsic desire to break free from that in order to experience the world around her.

The idea of being on a journey of discovery was noted not only when Erin reflected on her schooling, but also when she discussed developing the racial-justice curriculum for her eighth grade students.

I approached curriculum develop for this course from the perspective that we’re all on the same journey. We’re maybe one step ahead. That’s where the real work is!

For Erin, teaching a course on racial-justice was an opportunity for both students and teachers to process new and challenging ideas together—an opportunity that one seeks out and journeys to rather than waiting for it to find them.

One of the sessions from the curriculum that Erin developed with the teachers addressed her desire that both she and her students process the role of race in housing.

It’s not just a coincidence that I grew up where I did and that the people in my neighborhood all looked like me. It’s a parallel situation here, too.

The “here” Erin referred to is the school district and neighborhood of her students. In this session, Erin explained that she asked students to explore a PBS interactive website called Race: The Power of an Illusion. One link helped students discover the role of government and policies that determine where people live and how they acquire wealth or are limited from doing so.

I felt the stories of the two families was a powerful way for students to think about race as an institution. They had difficulty with this.

102

This type of lesson was challenging for Erin’s students who, she went on to describe, had little awareness of the way racism works beyond sporadic, individual acts of hate.

Jamie: “Leading with the heart”

Jaime lived and schooled within the boroughs of New York City. In her urban environment, exposure to racial diversity was commonplace. Jamie talked about her peers and her K-12 schooling:

They always made me feel welcome; they always made me feel like part of the community. We were all kind of going toward one goal, which was to grow up and go to college and all be successful. There was definitely this camaraderie that we all felt. There was this feeling that those on the outside see us in a certain way, and we always felt very strongly that we wanted to be successful together. It was more about fighting this image, this stereotype that is always portrayed upon Hispanic and Black people, just people of color in general. So it was this idea that we were going to prove them wrong about who we are.

Jamie described an awareness that she and her peers had, even as young people, of negative societal views about people of color. She and her peers pushed back against these deficit views and reconstructed a positive narrative of themselves and their futures.

She also reflected about the ways her teachers influenced her:

I’m thinking of my high school principal, Dr. Napolitano. He was always very supportive of kids and he always said to us that it was important that we learn, and that we become independent, educated women—I was in an all-girls school. So I think he would say that education was about independence, it was about standing on your own two feet and being a woman in this world.

Messages from caring, supportive educators caused Jamie to experience school as a space where teaching extends beyond the content areas. Jamie’s reflections demonstrated an ideology about the purpose of school and the role of educators—to prepare students to stand firm in the world and be able to be self-sufficient. Interestingly, absent from this ideology was an acknowledgment of the barriers that exist in society for

103

Jamie and her peers of color. Instead, Jamie’s educators seemed to espouse a meritocracy ideology that positioned education and hard work as the keys they needed to succeed.

Despite this, and perhaps because of the camaraderie Jamie expressed she felt with her peers of color, she felt motivated to succeed. She discussed the influence this had on her:

What I remember is me and other children of color just being okay with who we were, being proud of who we are.

Jamie discussed the importance of “leading with the heart” when developing and teaching curriculum for the courses:

My kids have to trust me, and I have to help them learn to think very carefully about their word choices.

A session she identified from the curriculum that was an example of “leading from the heart” and thinking carefully about “word choices” was on symbols of hate and racism.

Jamie described providing her sixth grade students with cutouts of symbols and asking them to work in groups to categorize them into three piles: negative, positive, and neutral.

Some students weren’t sure where to put things and I pushed them to talk about it and to make a decision. That they could change it later after hearing from their peers in our class discussion.

When students took a visual walk to observe the decisions their peers made, Jamie recalled their reactions:

They couldn’t wait to go back to their table and change things in their piles. It was enlightening for them. To think about what symbol or word hurts who and why.

This session was an example of what Jamie hoped her sixth graders would learn about the potency of language, particularly when tied to a specific racial group, while exploring the context behind symbols or words.

104

Reid: “Time and patience”

Reid also reflected on both his neighborhood and experiences in middle and high school:

[...] the area that I grew up in my small neighborhood was predominantly middle class, but really was racially mixed. Whereas my school district also had kids coming from, poor neighborhoods that were also racially mixed, so when you met someone, their skin color didn’t necessarily tell you anything about their socioeconomic class in my neighborhood.

For Reid who grew up and was schooled in a diverse environment, understandings about race and economic status when he was an adolescent differed from those that he expressed can be developed by the students in the district where he teaches. A session the teachers developed in the racial-justice curriculum on labels was what Reid named “an effort to dispute stereotypes and narratives about race.” Reid revised and extended this session during his teaching. He identified this as one of the most important ways to begin a course on racial justice to disrupt the ideas he believed his affluent, White students acquire as a result of societal messages and the silencing of conversations about race where he teaches.

In this session, Reid explained that before students viewed a digital text called

“The Lab Decoy: A Portrait Session With a Twist,” he asked them to respond to the following questions in their notebooks: What is a label? What are stereotypes? After viewing the video, he asked students to discuss the ways labels can be harmful and contribute to biases. He also asked students to think about the ways that labels can be useful.

105

I want students to think about labels and stereotypes as complex issues. That they aren’t just bad. But to think about whether labels can be used to understand people and not just judge people. Students can misinterpret easily and teachers need to give them time and have patience.

During this reflection about growing up and schooling in diverse versus homogeneous environments, Reid linked the importance of understanding students’ background to the development of the racial-justice curriculum. Further, as primarily a high school teacher, he shared his insights about the middle-school child and his concern about content and facilitation that would support students of this age range.

Reid recalled the issue of “White flight” in his neighborhood post-middle school, a topic that, like Erin, he believed was essential to the curriculum. Like Erin’s parents,

Reid was asked by his parents to consider staying local for high school or making a different choice. Reid, however, chose his local school which, unlike for Erin, provided exposure to diversity close to home.

I always did feel happy so, I didn’t feel that I needed to move schools. I had a great experience. There was a real focus on African American history. It was a big part of our school district. For Black History Month, Wynton Marsalis came one year. My band teacher was the nephew of Duke Ellington, so we had a lot of Black role models in the school, which was an important part of the district’s mission. My teachers were still predominantly White, I’m guessing, if I think about it, but I definitely had a number of African Americans and Hispanic teachers growing up.

For Reid, access to teachers of color when he was in high school meant having educators different from himself whom he identified as role models. He noted the ways these educators, as well as his White teachers, affirmed the racial and cultural identities of African Americans, provided positive representations, and disrupted dominant narratives.

106

Reid reflected on how his teachers, particularly the White teachers, became invested in teaching about African American history:

I think that they were good teachers in that they looked to think about what their students would find compelling and interesting and I think that that was part of it. I do think the school district itself through the community support, was bringing in people and, you know, for assemblies, that was part of the culture of the school, so I think it became part of what the teachers saw as their mission, and what they were there to do. They had a really profound impact on me, you know, thinking about race.

Evident in Reid’s background are the ways in which learning and thinking about race were fostered throughout his life. It was, as he described, a mission—the very DNA of the school itself and the community. His reflection demonstrated the ways in which one’s upbringing can profoundly shape the choices made in adulthood. Reid’s upbringing influenced choices in his professional work as a teacher. As a result of Reid’s K-12 experiences, his DNA held the desire to engage parts of his life—where he lives and raises children—in ways that mirrored his background.

Sonja: “Lift every voice and sing”

In my researcher journal, I also reflected on the influence that teachers and administrators had on me during my K-12 schooling in urban environments:

Whenever I hear the Black National Anthem, I think about middle school. In a course I took with Dr. James Banks, we discussed national and cultural pride. He asked if I knew the Black National Anthem. At first, I felt singled out as the only other African American person in the class besides Dr. Banks. But then I quickly realized that he was seeking acknowledgment of a common, positive experience for many African Americans who schooled in predominantly brown and black spaces. I answered yes. Then he asked me to sing it with him for the class. As we recited the words in song, I thought about how each morning in middle school, I sang these words along with my peers and the pride I felt. Every teacher, even those who were White sang it. Even though we began the morning by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, it was singing The Black National Anthem right after that provided a sense of unity and assurance that my community, my

107

heritage were important. When I was in middle school, I didn’t know that being African American was something that the world didn’t want me to be proud of.

Like Jamie, I recalled strong feelings of pride about my race during my schooling. From this reflection, an essential purpose of school to me was to acknowledge and honor the racial and cultural identities of students.

I continued to think about the relationship between students and administrators. I considered the way the principal of the middle school I attended influenced me:

My middle-school principal, Ms. Boyce, was a Black woman. She was like an aunt or a Godmother. She knew my name, she knew my brother’s name, and she knew my mother. I felt like she was genuinely happy to see me and my peers each day. Like she was proud we existed. Whenever we got into trouble, she was tough, and told us she expected more from us. She made sure we knew that our school was named after a Black woman—Philippa Duke Schuyler—who was gifted and talented. And she told us that like Schuyler, we too, had gifts and talents. I started taking piano during elementary school, but it was in middle school that I began to excel. I wanted to be like Philippa Duke Schuyler, who was also a pianist, and Ms. Boyce made me believe I could.

Here, I reflect on the ways educators, like Ms. Boyce, can make students feel visible, which includes affirmations of race. Also, I characterize the relationship between Black students and Black teachers as more than supportive and encouraging role models, but familial.

During a focus group interview, I discussed a session on colorblindness with my colleagues. I named this as one of the most essential sessions in the curriculum to help students explore what it really means when people say that they are colorblind and do not see race.

One of our colleagues told me, “I don’t see race,” and in the same conversation said, “I’d be a target if I went to Harlem.” Now how is that possible? I need kids to really think about this and whether this is helpful or harmful. Because after this session, I tell my students that if they don’t see color, then they don’t see me. That makes it more real for them.

108

Visibility and acknowledgment of race were noted here in the sense that I wanted students to understand that noticing and naming race are not problematic. Racism is. I had noticed that my students felt uncomfortable naming racial groups and reflected on this with my colleagues during a focus group interview.

I just think that many students are raised that it’s not polite to talk about it. And our schools reinforce this.

The importance of the racial-justice curriculum, therefore, is its potential to break silences about race that students experience both outside of and in school.

Reflections on Developing a Consciousness About Race During K-12 Schooling

In this study, one point I was looking for was to explore to what extent each of the teachers’ life stories influences their teaching. I discovered that the sociocultural background of each teacher played an important role in the contributions they made to develop the racial-justice curriculum. Race was an important factor in the way we each experienced our own K-12 schooling, whether we attended predominantly White, suburban schools or racially-diverse schools in urban and suburban environments. For

Jamie, Reid, and me, the role of race was overt in the ways our schools were structured.

Race was acknowledged in curriculum and made central in the pedagogical decisions of our teachers who were of various racial backgrounds. For Erin, the absence of racial diversity in her K-8 education and community raised an awareness for her of the homogeneity of suburban schools. It engendered the desire to learn in an environment that reflected the world that was just beyond her boundaries.

109

The development and teaching of the racial-justice curriculum for their White students were informed, in part, by the teachers’ individual experiences and backgrounds.

In essence, we seemed to draw from our racialized experiences for several of the sessions we developed and taught. This included topics such as: the role of racism in the way neighborhoods and schools are designed; the impact of racist and hateful language; and how misguided approaches toward race result in dismissing important aspects of a person’s identity.

Some researchers have suggested that for all learners, sociocultural background is an essential factor that affects their learning (Freire, 2000; Jones, 2006; Ladson-Billings,

1996; Morrell, 2008). Prior experiences and community concerns, Freire argued, should be the framework from which teaching emerges—where learners are engaged in a process of identifying issues that impact their lives and then seeking ways to address them. Applying this perspective, then, to all learners, including educators, reveals the importance of understanding the sociocultural background of each teacher who is not simply a knowledge-holder but also a learner himself or herself. This is particularly true when learning to reflect on the role of race, a topic that is seldom broached by White,

K-12 teachers or advanced in their classrooms, and which requires first an interrogation of one’s own biases (Milner, 2003, 2005).

In the following sections, I examine each of the teachers’ perspectives on discussions about race in the school district where we teach because this also gave impetus to developing and teaching the racial-justice curriculum. That is, our professional experiences informed our ideas about the purposes and goals of a racial-justice curriculum, specifically in our school district.

110

Teachers’ Reflections on Race in Their School District

Each of the teachers expressed that one of the biggest roadblocks to engaging in discourse around race and racism in our school district was discomfort. This sentiment has been echoed in the research on White educators’ and students’ recognition of the ways race matters in their lives (Castagno, 2008). Looking across the data, various insights were shared by each of us regarding discussions or instruction about race in our school district.

Discussing race in K-12 schools. Reflections on how race is dicussed in our district revealed a commonality. From each of our individual perspectives, I noted the ways we believed that discussions about race in our school district were avoided, limited, or absent.

Erin. In her response about the ways she felt issues about race were discussed in her school district, Erin had this to say:

Definitely more through historical perspective, than current issues for sure. Because I think there’s less of a focus on current events even, and there’s more opportunity to through literature and history and I think it is addressed in those, and has been, you know, in different degrees. But mostly, I would say the perception is “Oh, that’s discussed in social studies or that’s discussed based on what they read but not in science, not in math, not in general.” So I guess there has been sort of a compartmentalization of that. And also, just, ignoring it. And not acknowledging it.

Erin described what she viewed as a “compartmentalization” of race limited to specific content areas and only when the topic seemed to lend itself to such conversations, such as in the context of the historical past. It is in these spaces where, Erin believed, her colleagues were more at ease to have conversations about race, albeit brief and limited in scope. Erin explained that her colleagues were “just ignoring it” and “not acknowledging

111

it,” and if conversations happened at all, they were sporadic. Erin offered a rationale for such limitations and absences of conversations about race:

I can speak from my own perspective, it’s been a process of awakening, and, we are not a diverse district and I think these are issues that are not necessarily present on a day-to-day basis for most of the people who are here. And I think a lot of people don’t think about it because they’re not directly affected by it and so it’s not been addressed. And there are many blindspots. I think people are always afraid.

As I reread Erin’s description of the colleagues in our school district, I noted what seemed to me was a contradition. She repeatedly spoke about how the issue of race did not come up and there were many blindspots. She also stated that her colleagues were afraid. I wondered whether it was blindspots or fear that, from Erin’s perspective, prevented her colleagues from taking on issues of race. Another obstacle Erin identified was what she perceived as her colleagues’ belief that race was not an issue that affected them as White teachers or their White students.

Jamie. A different perspective on the school district was provided by Jamie who discussed the ways she believed issues about race were deflected:

I’ve heard my colleagues say, “We don’t have a race problem, we have a socioeconomic problem.” Some voices have more clout to them. Because they have more clout, they’re the ones that are heard. When they say, “We don’t have a race issue,” then it’s taken as fact.

Jaime also noted her White colleagues’ reluctance to acknowledge race. However, she named the ways in which louder, privileged voices in her school district silenced conversations about race and pivoted to issues such as socioeconomics, which she expressed were more in line with her White colleagues’ comfort levels. In a context where the dominant majority are White, Jaime provided a window into the myriad ways

112

conversations about race were both challenging and challenged. Jamie provided an example of how she believed issues of race affected her students.

I’ve stayed in this district because I teach the ELL students and my colleagues don’t really care about my kids. When they come into my classroom, they are going to get love, they are going to get the attention that they deserve, they are going to feel like they are part of a community. One of my students came from Guatemala and wasn’t able to speak English yet. She said that her teacher wouldn’t talk to her. So I set her up with a chromebook with Google translator and we practiced how she could advocate for herself in that classroom. She came back to me in tears carrying the chromebook. She said she typed a question in and showed it to her teacher translated in English like we’d practiced, but her teacher closed it and said, “I can’t help you.” And that’s just one of many examples of how teachers in my district just don’t provide the care that my children need. Sometimes children just need to know that you care about them in order to learn.

Although Jamie shared how her White colleagues refused to acknowledge the ways race matters, from her perspective, they were making race-based decisions about which students they would support and care for and which students they would not.

Reid. When providing his perspective about how race is or is not addressed, Reid made a connection between the school district and his background and K-12 schooling:

I came from a place where diversity was important, particularly Black culture, growing up. It was celebrated. It was a part of my identity. I grew up loving hip hop music. Loving James Baldwin. Loving Black literature. It was in my DNA. So that was part of how I designed classes and African American literature played a big role in what I wanted to teach. In the English department, there was a big discussion of diversifying the curriculum when I was coming in. And it was a rocky road.

Coming from a diverse K-12 educational background influenced the decisions Reid made in his new role as a high school English teacher in a predominantly White school district.

Reid’s perceptions about the district and its approach to developing curriculum that addressed race contrasted with Erin’s and Jaime’s perceptions of resistance at their middle school in this same district. Although Reid referred to the attempt as “a rocky

113

road,” he noted an attempt in the high school to at least have conversations about race and having a more diverse curriculum. As a result, Reid explained how he utilized his background to take specific actions in the high school to advance discussions about race.

I got involved pretty early in—I noticed there was no Black history month at all. I was interested in that. It was something I grew up with. So I just put out some posters like anyone who’s interested, come to a meeting, I’d love to talk about it. Some kids showed up and so my first couple of years there, we did Black history month things each year. Kind of student-generated. We talked through stuff.

Reid’s upbringing, which included a focus on African American literature and culture, was used as a lens to develop new school structures, such as student-led Black history discussions and activities. Further actions included the development of an elective course for high-school students that centered race and gender. Reid reflected on the impetus for this course.

There was a series of incidents with the N-word written on a locker that set in motion the process that would become the race and gender class. The Department of Justice came down to the school and recommended the school take action. The student was someone that I knew pretty well. I had a good relationship with her. I’d done some work with Facing History Facing Ourselves which does work on antisemitism and the Holocaust. And then, I had done a bunch of work on African American literature in high school and college and so out of there came a recommendation for a class. And the curriculum, I’ve designed completely myself. I didn’t have any input or help from anyone, I just went about it.

In a district characterized by the teachers of this study as reluctant and hesitant to discuss race, Reid described a clear act of racism that required the intervention of the

Department of Justice. To me, such response demonstrated an inability and possibly unwillingness among educators in the district to address racism, requiring instead the work of an agency of the federal government. Reid’s connection to the student targeted

114

by this act of racism, coupled with his educational background, galvanized him to take action through the construction of a course that would center issues related to race.

Sonja. In several journal entries and memos, I reflected on my experiences with issues related to race and racism in the district:

I observed a mob of White high-school students crowding the entrance to their building. About 100 seniors dressed in school colors were screaming, yelling, and taunting the underclassmen who dared to attempt to pass them in order to enter the building. Then I heard their chanting of the racial-epithet, nigger, as part of the explicit lyrics of a rap song blaring from a nearby parked car.

Similar to Reid, I also contemplated past events in the school district and identified pivotal moments that brought me to the work of developing and teaching the racial- justice curriculum and being the researcher of this study. This memo is an example of my recollections of the types of micro- as well as macroaggressions I had navigated while teaching in the district. As such, racism, for me, was more than a construct that operated systemically. Its affects were deeply personal. In my researcher journal, I wrote another entry about this incident:

The high-school principal apologized on behalf of the students and promised he’d use this as a “teachable moment.” But the real blow came from the superintendent’s response. He stated that we could use the experience, “as awful as it was for me,” to help our students understand the impact of the spoken word. He then suggested that I meet with some of the seniors to share my experience and let them know how that made me feel.

From my perspective, the response from administration indicated a lack of sensitivity as well as an unwillingness to confront racism. Rather than being alarmed by the behavior of the students who chanted a racial epithet in front of their school, administrators minimized and dismissed their actions. It was unclear: What was the teaching and when was the moment for the school to address racism and help students realize the importance

115

of their words, and how to think about others through the lens of race? Further, I wondered: Whose responsibility was it to assist students with this? It felt like the onus was placed on me, the African American teacher, rather than on all of the teachers in the district.

I continued to reflect on what brought me to the work of developing and teaching the racial-justice curriculum:

I co-founded the Race Matters Committee with Reid in order to identify and work with a group of teachers who were interested in and committed to engaging in conversations about race. I hoped that together, we would examine where, in our practice, were the spaces where these types of conversations could occur— beyond instruction about the historical past.

Inciting incidents such as those both Reid and I described demonstrated some of the overt ways issues related to race and racism have surfaced in our district, despite the lack of awareness or reluctance that Erin and Jamie described in reference to their White colleagues. The reflections revealed each of our perspectives about how race is dealt with in their district and, for some of us, the actions taken in an effort to disrupt silences about race.

Reflections on Discussing Race in K-12 Schools

There was consensus among the four teachers about the way race is addressed in the environment in which they each taught. In naming our observations, however, there was a variation of word choice. We used words and phrases such as ignored, avoided, lack of awareness, fear, and discomfort, almost as though they were synonyms. In fact, our perceptions about how race is addressed in our district were likely a hybrid of all of

116

these descriptors. Although we all agreed race is ignored, we also agreed that it is a problem that affects people’s lives in our school district.

The teachers provided numerous examples of what we saw as the consequences that resulted from issues related to race going unaddressed in their district. For example,

Erin noted the avoidance of race by colleagues, as she expressed the notion that her

White colleagues did not believe they or their White students were affected by race. This seemingly resulted in missed opportunities to examine the role of race presently, not just historically. Also, Jamie noted the resistance of her colleagues regarding discussions around race and raicsm. By refusing to engage in the process of examining and decentering Whiteness, her colleagues simply ignored race and named socioeconomics as an issue in their schools. Further, and most problematic, was the way in which the experience of school was adversely altered for Jamie’s student who felt ostracized by her teacher and Reid’s student whose locker was defaced with a racial epithet and the district’s failure to take action until pressured by the Department of Justice. Finally, I also noted examples of how addressing overt issues of race in the district was onerous. Such difficulties contributed to my decision to form the Race Matters Committee, which could serve as a space where educators could discuss the challenge of shattering silences around race in their curricula and in our district.

In the following sections, I discuss the teachers’ individual and collective views on what a racial-justice curriculum is and how such constructions are informed by each of our individual sociocultural backgrounds and our perceptions about how race is addressed in our school district.

117

Perspectives on the Racial-Justice Curriculum

As previously mentioned, experiences with race in each of the teachers’ K-12 backgrounds as well as in their professional lives led us to developing the content we had planned to teach. Interestingly, we entered into this work without ever sitting down and first discussing what we believed a racial-justice curriculum was. In retrospect, we had all been working as if we had a consensus, but I discovered nuances in our ideas throughout this study and the ways in which our ideas evolved. There were distinct and, at times, overlapping ideas about what a racial-justice curriculum is and, more specifically, its purpose when utilized with predominantly White students.

Constructing Definitions About the Racial-Justice Curriculum

Erin, Jamie, and Reid expressed the ways in which they believed a racial-justice curriculum is critical, especially in our school district. Additionally, they discussed aspects of the racial-justice curriculum that were examples of its importance, particularly with their students. I asked each of the teachers to share ideas about what a racial-justice curriculum is and then looked across their responses to draw some conclusions.

Erin. Erin seemed to define a racial-justice curriculum as one that both informs and provides opportunities for students to explore:

In my mind, a racial-justice curriculum is one where students are provided with information about the inequality that exists systemically and how that affects people. And once they have that information, then it’s exploring the different ways in which that manifests itself so they can see evidence of that. It’s needed because there just isn’t the knowledge, the awareness. It just doesn’t exist with this population.

118

Here, Erin made note of what she believed was her students’ lack of knowledge and awareness about race. Implicit in Erin’s response seemed to be the idea of having to prove that racism exists to White students who needed to “see evidence of that.”

Subsequently, Erin implied that a racial-justice curriculum is important, not only in her school district but in White school districts in general.

A key part and aspect of the curriculum that Erin cited as helping her White students develop an awareness and understanding was the glossary that students were asked to maintain in their notebooks, where they co-constructed definitions such as race, racism, and stereotypes. She shared, “This was the strongest anchor for them during the course.” Erin frequently noted the ways her eighth grade students challenged the curriculum by asking her, “Is that really racism? How do we know? Maybe it’s just a coincidence.” For Erin, the glossary was an essential part of the racial-justice curriculum.

Understanding the different types of racism and being able to look back on those definitions often during the quarter. They were more receptive when I emphasized the ‘ology’ of it.

Continually reviewing the glossary and terms, according to Erin, anchored students understanding about race and racism and helped to mitigate their resistance.

Jamie. Jaime also emphasized the importance of awareness and, in particular, the ways a racial-justice curriculum can address blindspots:

For me, racial-justice curriculum is about equity and creating an environment where all of us feel accepted. Where we all of feel like we’re part of something. Where we all feel like we’re going toward a similar goal, so that everyone can be successful. So a racial-justice curriculum is about getting students to understand that race is always involved, whether it’s unconscious or conscious, it’s always there. We talk a lot about blindspots and that we all have them. It’s about students learning to understand that race and racism is a structure that’s been designed to perpetuate separation. To keep certain people at the top and to keep other people at the bottom.

119

Similar to Jaime’s recollections about her K-12 experiences, this response revealed her ideas about the importance of community and working toward a common goal. Jaime described the essentiality of this in a racial-justice curriculum. Further, Jamie included herself in her ideology about what a racial-justice curriculum is by using “we” and “us”

(“...where all of us feel accepted.” “Where we all feel like we’re part of something”), indicating that this work is not like other curricula, where the teacher, more traditionally, is the knowledge-holder and students are primarily the learners. It is, as Erin also noted, an experience that teachers and students journey through together.

For Jaime, establishing a co-constructing class contract was an essential step toward creating the kind of environment she envisioned with her sixth graders:

It emphasized the importance of being part of a community where we will make mistakes and it’s okay.

A racial-justice curriculum, from Jamie’s perspective, seemed to be about teachers and students building a community in which they can thrive while taking on the challenges of this work togther.

Reid. Reid explicated three key ideas that comprised his understanding about what racial justice is and, thusly, he contended, should serve as the creation of a racial- justice curriculum.

For me, I think the idea of racial justice is an understanding that race in America gets made in institutions, gets made between individuals, and it gets made within the psychology of people. And I think that a racial-justice curriculum has to address what are the ways we can shift all three of those things and they’re interdependent. I can teach kids to think carefully about their blindspots and interpersonal relationships. Great. But if they’re not going to interact with any adults in the building who, were they can test those skills out, they’re not really going to stick. And that’s an institutional problem. We need to look at how we recruit. And where we’re advertising. And how we hire. Which I think is true of most of America.

120

Also paramount for Reid in a racial-justice curriculum is students having opportunities to apply the strategies they are learning in a racially-diverse setting.

However, this is challenging in White-dominated institutions, such as our school district, which he identified as a facet of institutional racism. Reid further expounded on the importance of a racial-justice curriculum in schools.

Race is one of the most important American stories and it’s the most complicated American story and I think it seems silly not to have a place to analyze and examine it and to deal with it. I think it really behoves us to. From an intellectual standpoint, it is so central to our identity, that I don’t see why we wouldn’t want to study it. These students are going to go on to, especially in this school district, positions of power and have opportunities to make choices. I always say we have a dumb brain and we have a smart brain. I want them to use their smart brain and I want them to be aware of the blindspots in understanding something as simple as integrated schools doesn’t mean your kids won’t do as well. Racial-justice curriculum is necessary. If parents aren’t going to do it, or are scared to, then schools need to step in and give kids a place to do it that’s safe and responsible and based on thought and research.

Here, Reid gave voice to power and privilege and the ways they shape the trajectory of the lives of his White students. He perceived addressing race in schools as a necessary action that can guide the future choices of White students who, he believed inevitably because of their Whiteness and institutional racism, will “go on to positions of power.”

Reid identified race as a narrative he believed his school ignores and that it is a responsibility of the school to address it.

Reflections on Constructing Definitions About the Racial-Justice Curriculum

Erin, Jamie, and Reid provided numerous insights into what a racial-justice curriculum is to them, its purpose, and the ways in which this is informed by both their personal and professional backgrounds and experiences. An analysis of their reflections

121

across the data about the racial-justice curriculum brought several important ideas to light. A racial-justice curriculum is dedicated to looking at the interpersonal, institutional, and internal aspects of race and to exposing the blindspots that exist, particularly in predominantly White schools. It centers the experiences of people of color in order to provide perspectives typically silenced in schools where Whiteness is normalized. Yet, such decentering was challenging at times for both the teachers and, as they reported, their students. The teachers in this research study espoused the racial-justice curriculum as necessary to challenge silences around race and racism.

Reflections on the Sociocultural Portraits of Teachers: Perspectives on Race and Constructions of the Racial-Justice Curriculum

As I examined the data, I considered each teacher’s lived experiences and what brought them all to this work of developing and teaching curriculum about race and racism. Each of their reflections revealed complex interactions and understandings of the world. This led to the findings discussed in this chapter: developing a consciousness about race during K-12 schooling, discussing race in K-12 schools, and constructing definitions about racial-justice curriculum.

Teaching has more resonance and heart when teachers draw on what they know.

However, in order for schools to become spaces where equity and democracy are centered, which leads to transformative social change, critical theorists have argued that curriculum must not be detached from students’ realities (Freire, 2000; Freire & Macedo,

1987; Jones, 2006; Morell, 2008). Race is part of all students’ realities. Yet, including race in the curriculum can be problematic for educators who, unlike the teachers in this

122

study, are not able to talk confidently about race. Therefore, an implication that can be drawn from examining the sociocultural backgrounds of each teacher, and how this has influenced their willingness to develop and teach curriculum about race in their district, is the importance of teacher education programs in preparing teachers to take up such work.

I began this chapter with the lyrics from “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” the Black

National Anthem, because to me, it is symbolic of the teachers and the ways each of their backgrounds, both personally and professionally, have shaped their views about race.

Specifically, it symbolizes their pioneering efforts to take up racial-justice work in their predominantly White school district. Throughout the social justice movements of our past and present that have transformed the nation, music has been a cornerstone. Singing is an act of resistance to oppression, and songs have the ability to empower and uplift.

The imagery of roads and pathways in “Lift Every Voice and Sing” rang true when Erin discussed being on a journey, together with her students, throughout the smooth and bumpy parts of the work. Moreover, it was representative of Jaime who viewed this work as leading from the heart, who gave voice to the importance of fostering community and who thought of the “we,” the “us,” and the “our” in this work like the perspective of this song. Notes of hope and faith, as in the lyrics, resounded when Reid named time and patience as essential qualities of doing this work well. And I see myself in these lyrics, seeking out colleagues and “facing the rising sun of a new day” with comrades, marching forward in a school district where discussions about race are absent.

Songs, such as this one, have the potential to encourage, to help people find strength and carry on. So, too, does the support of colleagues who forge together toward developing and teaching both groundbreaking and controversial curriculum in their school district.

123

In the following chapters, I continue to discuss the findings of this study. More specifically, I discuss the racial-justice curriculum that was developed and what the teachers reported they have learned from teaching it across the 2017-2018 school year.

As the teachers reflected on their work, these experiences were often tangled and difficult to isolate. For the teachers, their planning and ideas came to life once they began to teach, which resulted in significant insights about the curriculum itself and the process of teaching about race and racism.

Therefore, the chapters that follow are not designed to address each of the research questions separately. Instead, because of the interconnectedness between developing and teaching the curriculum, as well as the challenges the teachers faced throughout, my discussion of what they have shared is intertwined. However, in order to examine more closely these insights and what the teachers have learned from these experiences, I focus primarily on our reflections about the curriculum in Chapter V. I discuss the curriculum itself and its structures, my findings on the two main types of revisions each of the teachers made to the curriculum, as well as the major conundrums and debates with which we wrestled. Then, in Chapter VI, I address the teaching of the courses. Specifically, I discuss my findings on the usefulness of digital texts and each of the teachers’ implementation of distinct facilitation methods that helped them to teach about race with their White students. Further, I detail the essential questions each teacher believed was crucial to consider when deciding to teach about race and racism. In both

Chapters V and VI, I consider the ways these reflections overlap and how the teachers’ experiences continued to help me refine ideas about the goals and purposes of racial-

124

justice curriculum. Finally, in Chapter VII, I provide conclusions and implications for the field of education.

125

Chapter V

TEACHERS’ REFLECTIONS ON DEVELOPING

THE RACIAL-JUSTICE CURRICULUM

An examination of the data led to findings about the types of revisions each of the teachers made to the racial-justice curriculum. Some of these revisions occurred during the teaching of the courses. Additional revisions occured during the focus group discussion. I present my findings around two notable ways that the curriculum was revised: to include additional content to a session and to change the sequence of sessions.

First, I provide an overview of the curriculum the teachers developed for their racial-justice courses. I detail the scope and sequence of the curriculum as well as the framework that shaped each teaching session, and I provide examples of how the sessions were originally planned to unfold. Then, I discuss my findings around the two major types of revisions we each made to the curriculum. I also address some of the major debates that occurred when the teachers reflected on the curriculum and the ways we each believed it should be revised. Finally, I include the ways that reflecting on the development and teaching of the curriculum provided further insights into what a racial- justice curriculum is.

126

Overview, Scope, and Sequence of the Racial-Justice Curriculum

In looking across the data and specifically the discussions about developing the curriculum, I noted that the teachers seemed to approach this work as a journey we had hoped to take students on. As we plotted out the journey, we grappled with several issues, including: Which topics are foundational? What might increase students’ receptiveness to the curriculum? Given that the students are predominantly White and privileged, what is the sequence of topics that might be most effective in opening their eyes to issues about race and racism? In the course overview we constructed, shown in Table 4, I noted that the most essential goal of the curriculum, at times, seemed to be overshadowed. For example, we had stated that the major objective of the curriculum was to spark conversations about race and racism in our classrooms. However, across various discussions about the development of curriculum, an emphasis on content exclipsed the importance of conversations.

During the focus group discussion, we reflected on the goals of the curriculum as we had initially planned. Our conversations revealed the ways in which our primary objective of centering discussions about race and racism at times fell short, in part due to concerns about classroom management and having enough content to fill the 80-minute sessions. Some of the methods and materials we had planned to utilize, including digital texts, essays, and other media, were also considered. In Chapter VI, I explore further each of the teachers’ reflections and discoveries about methods and materials once they each began teaching their course about race and racism.

127

Table 4

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions About Race and Racism

Objective This course aims to center discussions about race and racism. Digital texts, picture books, articles, essays and other types of texts will be used to spark conversations that help students recognize individual, interpersonal, and institutional racism. Essential to these courageous conversations are the racial literacy skills students will acquire that help them to recognize, name, and challenge various forms of everyday racism.

Goals Students will:

• Understand that racism exists in many different arenas and capacities • Understand that biases are often not obvious or immediately present on the surface • Learn key racial literacy vocabulary such as: race; ethnicity; racism; racial justice; antiracism; allies; assumptions; colorblindness; discrimination; equity; identity; individual, interpersonal, and institutional racism; marginalized; microaggressions; narrative; counternarrative; oppression; prejudice; privilege; supremacy; systems; social, economic, and political conditions; stereotype • Learn conversational strategies to discuss racism • Learn tools to challenge topics • Learn strategies to deconstruct canned, racial narratives and acquire counternarratives that provide perspectives that have been silenced

We discussed how we used the course objective and goals we had outlined to inform the individual yet interconnected sessions of the curriculum. Looking back, we discussed gaps and omissions in our work as well as our revised thinking about the order of topics. The full curriculum, including all of the reflection questions, texts, and activities we originally developed, is located in Appendix C. Table 5 shows an overview of the scope and sequence of the curriculum we initially decided on and a brief outline of each session.

128

Table 5

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions About Race and Racism Curriculum Scope and Sequence

Guiding Questions Session Title Objective and Digital Texts

1 Exploring Students will explore their own How can labels be harmful and Identities and identities along with the contribute to biases? How can Labels preconceived concept of labels labels be useful? Can we use labels and stereotypes. to understand people rather than to judge people?

The Lab Decoy: A Portrait Session with a Twist (3:17)

2 Identities and Students, together with the When did you first realize that race Labels (cont’d) teacher, will establish exists? Describe a moment when Establishing guidelines and expectations for you realized that race matters. Guidelines and class meetings. In addition, How does this relate to the Expectations students will brainstorm criteria disussion of labels? for a rubric that will be used to determine the class grade (pass 6th & 7th grade - The Lie (2:39) or fail) for the quarter. 8th grade - I Am NOT Black, You are NOT White (4:35)

3 What Is Race? Students will begin to acquire What is race? What is racism? the vocabulary needed to discuss issues of race and Race: The Power of an Illusion racism. Terms explored during (PBS Website – Time will vary) this lesson: Race and Racism.

4 What is Race? Students will continue to What is institutional racism, (cont’d) acquire key vocabulary needed interpersonal racism, internalized to discuss issues of race and racism? racism. Terms explored during this lesson: Institutional Race: The Power of an Illusion Racism, Interpersonal Racism, (PBS Website – Time will vary) Internalized Racism. The Myth of Race, Debunked in 3 Minutes (3:08) or White People: An Explainer (3:44)

5 Privilege, Students will reflect on the What privileges do you have? Supremacy, and ideas of privilege in society and Becoming an in their own lives through a Why Does Privilege Make People Ally variety of exercises and texts So Angry (4:51) including the work of Peggy Privilege Inventory from Race: The McIntosh. Power of an Illusion) Peggy McIntosh video (first few minutes)

129

Table 5 (continued)

Guiding Questions Session Title Objective and Digital Texts

6 Becoming an Students will brainstorm ways What does it mean to be an ally? Ally (cont’d) to be an ally, examine the How can you be an ally? Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship provided, and interact 5 Tips for Being an Ally (3:31) with the Framework for Anti- Letter for Black Lives (5:39) Racism Allyship by examining examples of allies.

7 Immigration— Students will explore the What are some challenges The Struggle for experiences of immigrants immigrants face? How do Entrance and who have traveled to the opportunities for immigrants vary Acceptance United States to examine the based on race? What does it mean challenges immigrants face when someone is labeled and how these challenges are “immigrant” in the United States? affected by race. Vignettes - Immigrant Experiences Immigrants (We Get the Job Done) (6:07)

8 Stereotypes and Students will examine the What is a stereotype? Why do Visibility concept of stereotypes to stereotypes exists? understand reasons why they exist. Students will also reflect Six Misconceptions about Native on the concept of visibility by American People (3:04) reflecting on media they Proud to Be (2:00) encounter and how it reflects the representation of racial diversity.

9 Colorblindness Students will discuss and What does it mean to be colorblind define what they believe the when relating to human beings? Is term colorblindess means. this approach helpful or harmful?

MTV Decoded: Why Colorblindness Won’t End Racism (5:36)

10 Symbols of Hate Students will explore the ways What are symbols? Why might a and Racism symbols are used to convey word or symbol be offensive or ideas, qualities, emotions, hateful to one person, but not to opinions, and beliefs. Further, another? Who gets to decide if a symbols are also used to symbol is offensive? What gives convey hatred and bias. symbols their meaning? (Lesson adapted from the Anti-Defamation League) Native American’s Review Sports Mascots (2:45)

130

Table 5 (continued)

Guiding Questions Session Title Objective and Digital Texts

11-14 Racial Justice Students will apply and How does race and racism play Projects: synthesize what they have learned a role in our everyday lives? Looking Through by engaging in group projects. the Lens of Race Students will research and read to Topics by Grade Level collect information and develop their projects. 6th Grade: Representation of Race in Literature and Media (Diversity in Children’s Literature, Oscars So White)

7th Grade: Environmental Racism (Hurricane Katrina & The Ninth Ward; Flint Michigan Water Crisis; The South Dakota Pipeline Conflict)

8th Grade: Government and Law (Immigration; Racial Profiling; Police Brutality; Confederate Monument removals)

15 & 16 Presentation of Students will present their How does race and racism play projects projects to share the information a role in our everyday lives? gleaned and the conclusions they have drawn about the role of race in their everyday lives.

17 & 18 Reflections of Students will revisit the guiding When did I first become aware Self-Awareness questions from day one. Students of race? When did I first realize of Race: Writing will read and reflect on several that race matters? Our Narratives model narratives. Then students will compose their own reflections in response of the above questions.

19 & 20 Culminating In order to demonstrate their What have we learned by Activities learning and bring the class to having courageous closure, students will engage in a conversations about race? variety of culminating activities.

131

In addition to the categories demonstrated in this chart such as the objective, guiding questions, and digital texts, other structures framed each of the teaching sessions.

These are detailed in the following sections.

Session Framework and Sample Lessons

Each of the sessions were 80 minutes long and occurred every other day of the school week. The teachers created a structure for how each session would unfold. This included attention to the physical environment of the classroom and routines that we believed would help the classses to run smoothly. We also felt this was important because it gave students a sense of familiarity as they engaged in conversations that, for many of them, were unfamiliar and uncomfortable. For example, when students entered the classroom, they would get their folder and notebook from the designated area of the classroom where they were kept. These materials remained in the classroom unless students requested to take them home. In general, we each shared that students were permitted to sit wherever they wanted in our classrooms, unless their behaviors warranted a change in seating. Desks and tables were organized for small groups of four or five students. In the following sections, I discuss the framework that we developed for each session.

Session and title. Because the courses occurred every other day of the school week, the teachers named the sessions Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, and so on. We also titled each session according to the topic we would be teaching. For example, during Session 1

(or Day 1), the focus was “Exploring Identities and Labels.” This topic continued during

Session 2 (Day 2) when we also planned to work with students on “Establishing

132

Guidelines and Expectations.” We planned some sessions to occur just one day. Others were planned for two or more days, such as the racial-justice inquiry projects which spanned across several days.

Notebooks and folders. We began each of our sessions by inviting students to spend a few minutes independently responding to questions in their notebooks. These questions could be the guiding questions for the session (provided in Table 5) or additional big idea questions teachers posed. For example, we asked students to respond to the following questions in their notebooks at the start of Session 1: What is a label?

What are stereotypes? How are labels and stereotypes connected? The notebook responses helped to prime students for discussions with their peers that would ensue across the session. We found that it was helpful to students to have written down a few ideas they could read from, if they needed to, when talking to their peers. Further, we felt it was important to provide time for students to think about ideas independently, in addition to having opportunities to think through ideas collaboratively. After having 5-10 minutes to respond in their notebooks, we invited students to discuss the questions and their responses at their table group with their peers. Sometimes this led to a whole class discussion.

We found that, for many students, their notebooks became a gateway for processing complex ideas and discussing them. Further, several students used their notebooks to ask questions of their teachers that they did not feel comfortable communicating within the larger group or even in private. Some questions were also asked rhetorically. For example, Jamie shared that in response to thinking about the racial-justice curriculum being taught in schools, one student used his notebook to write

133

about its importance and to ask metaphorically, “How do you know that you need medicine for a disease that you don’t know that you have?” We reflected on the importance of reading our students’ notebooks and how this provided direction that we used to tweak or revise the curriculum and instructional methods. Folders were provided to students to house the printed texts they engaged with during class including essays, articles, graphic organizers, and so on.

Digital texts. After students had time to respond to questions in their notebooks, they typically engaged a digital text. The use of digital texts became a staple of the course. Some days, such as Session 1 (Exploring Identities and Labels), the entire class would access the same digital text. On other days, such as Session 3 (What Is Race?), multiple digital texts were used at a time. Erin, Jamie, and I recalled spending hours researching digital texts and feeling unsatisfied that any one selection would work for each of the three grade levels. In fact, the teachers later reported that one of the major ways they revised the curriculum was by locating digital texts that they felt were stronger choices and/or better suited for their specific grade level. Digital texts were used for their ability to spark conversations about race and racism specific to the topics of each session.

Guiding questions. The use of guiding questions provided an overall focus of the work the teachers hoped to accomplish during a session. Typically, these questions occurred after engaging a digital text and were used for a variety of purposes. Guiding questions invited students to explore their knowledge and ideas about a topic or a concept such as What is race? and What does it mean to be an ally? The teachers also used guiding questions to provide opportunities for students to take an introspective look at their own experiences and to help them to develop a consciousness of race. Examples of

134

these kinds of questions included: When did you first realize that race exists? and What privileges do you have? Further, guiding questions were used to help students look outwardly, to think about power and privilege, and to explore alternative possibilities of being in the world. Examples of these types of questions included, Can we use labels to understand people rather than to judge people? and Who gets to decide if a symbol is offensive? The teachers invited students to think about these guiding questions in a variety of ways. Sometimes students responded to them in their notebooks; other times they discussed them in partnerships or small groups, or a combination of these methods was used.

Activities

An activity was planned for each day of the curriculum based on the topic of the session. The activity was related to the digital text students engaged. As we looked across the curriculum, we noted our use of iterative and overlapping approaches and experiences to help students access instruction about race and racism. The activities we’d planned invited students to create, define, apply, process, investigate, and reflect. Below is a snapshot of the types of activities we developed for the curriculum, which provides a window into the work of students in the sessions.

Creating. In Session 1, students created their own poster of identity labels and in

Session 2, they created a class contract. Also, students created a glossary in the back of their notebooks that they utilized across all sessions. Additional opportunities for creating occurred when students developed their racial-justice projects and when writing their own narratives about race.

135

Defining. Defining terms and concepts became an anchor of the course that helped students to develop racial literacy. During several sessions, students drew upon their discussions as well as the digital texts to define terms such as race, racism, sterotypes, institutitional racism, interpersonal racism, internalized racism, and more. In addition to defining these terms, students also constructed definitions about allyship that were specific to the actions they believed they could take to work toward racial-justice.

For allyship in particular, the students considered their ideas as a “working definition” that they added to across the course.

Applying. We also planned for students to have opportunities to apply the language they were acquiring. For instance, when students read texts such as My Secret

Life as an Undocumented Immigrant by Karell Roxas during Session 4 and Letters for

Black Lives: An Open Letter Project on Anti-Blackness during Session 6, they annotated the texts using the vocabulary they were acquiring. For example, students annotated parts of these narratives to reflect the places in the text where they identified the authors’ experiences as representative of institutional, interpersonal, and interpersonal racism.

Processing. Providing time to process concepts was planned for in each session in a variety of individual and collaborative ways. Students’ notebooks, the activities they engaged, and the conversations they took part in were entry points for different levels of understanding. Session 9 on colorblindness is an example of where we planned an activity, especially for students to spend time learning about and processing this concept collaboratively. In this session, we each wrote several statements about colorblindness in our individual courses such as “Colorblindness is disingenuous,” “Colorblindness invalidates people’s identities,” and “Colorblindness invalidates racist experiences.”

136

There were five to six statements in total. Each statement was written on separate large sheets of paper that were placed in different areas of the room. Working in small groups, students visited each area of the classroom to read the statement, process the concept through discussion, and write a response on the paper before rotating to the next station.

Further, once students rotated to their second station and from there on, they had the opportunity to read the ideas written by their peers. During this activity, students had opportunities to process the concept of colorblindness, discuss ideas about why it is problematic, and share their ideas as well as read those of their peers.

Investigating. Although we planned that most activities would encourage students to investigate racism beyond the historical past throughout the course, the racial- justice projects (RJP) were the strongest example of this. In fact, the RJP was an opportunity for students to engage in several approaches, including creating, applying, and, ultimately, synthesizing their learning as they worked collaboratively in research groups. The RJP was planned to provide students with the opportunity to take an extended gaze at racism in their everyday lives through the investigation of particular issues, such as: race in literature and media, environmental racism, and the role of race in laws, policy, and government.

Reflecting. We planned for students to reflect on their ideas, questions, and experiences throughout the curriculum in a variety of ways, such as in their notebooks and during discussions in small and large groups. Writing their own narratives, however, was another way we invited students to reflect on their self-awareness of race. Students read and discussed model narratives by two popular authors: It’s a School’s Job to

Acknowledge Race by Grace Lin and ‘We Don’t Make Princesses in Those Colours’:

137

Words I Didn’t Expect to Hear in 2017 by Nicola Yoon. Then they composed their own reflections that encouraged them to revisit two guiding questions that were posed early in the course: When did I first become aware of race? When did I first realize race matters?

Debrief and Looking Ahead

This part of the session framework occurred at the end of a session and provided an opportunity for students to return to their notebooks again to reflect independently about the work of the day. Typically, we provided questions for students to address as they debriefed. For example, students were invited to respond to the following questions at the end of Session 9 on colorblindness: If statements such as ‘I don’t see color’ and

‘It’s better to be colorblind’ aren’t helpful and in fact harmful, why do people say them?

What do they really mean when they say them? What should we say instead? Practices varied in terms of whether students shared their debrief reflections with peers or not, and these decisions varied between the individual teachers and from session to session, and were often based on the amount of remaining time.

Reflections on Session Framework

As I looked back at the structures that we developed in the curriculum, I made two observations. First, I noted ways that we drew upon our strengths as English language arts teachers. In the racial-justice curriculum we developed, we included a variety of strategies to make learning accessible to students, including asking them, at times, to create, define, apply, and reflect, and we used a combination of several strategies. Most noatable was our use of questions as an essential part of the curriculum and courses. During our curriculum development, we wrote many questions that we

138

planned for our students to consider. The questions were direct, distinct, and, at times, variations of themselves purposefully. The use of questions in instruction opens up possibilities for dialogue and the potential for a variety of perspectives to be voiced and heard (Freire, 2000; Freire & Macedo, 1987). Although we sometimes lost sight of this,

Erin summed up best what she believed our purpose was for including several questions in each session. “We titled the course: Sparking Courageous Conversations. So it was always about the talk. We relied on the questions to help students get at those discussions.” Second, I noted our use of digital texts as an essential component of the course. We planned for and used digital texts to spark the conversations we hoped our students would engage in. In the next chapter, I discuss further what the teachers reported they had learned once they moved from developing to teaching the curriculum, including the usefulness of digital texts and the facilitation methods used during these sessions.

It is important to note that although we developed a framework that we each planned to utilize across the sessions of our courses, this structure was not always followed. We reflected on a variety of reasons that caused us to adjust the format that we had planned. Time constraints were a frequently cited reason. We each reported adjustments in time allotted for students to journal, discuss, or complete activities. These adjustments resulted in either a decrease or an increase in time based on what the teachers and students felt required additional or less attention. Also, the topic of a session itself was altered at times to make space for what Erin referred to as “teachable moments.”

These included current events issues related to race and racism that occurred during the teaching quarter such as: “The Take A Knee Protest” inspired by Colin Kaepernick, the

Philadelphia Starbucks event, and the Dove advertising campaign.

139

We each taught our course on the same day and at the same time, and frequently met afterwards to have immediate discussions about the curriculum and students’ responses to instruction. Each of the teachers maintained a journal to keep notes about the sessions, to jot down concerns we wanted to share with one another, and to consider ways to strengthen the curriculum. As a result, this led to numerous revisions to the curriculum across the year. In the following section, I discuss my findings on the two major types of revisions made to the curriculum.

Curriculum Revisions

I noted several ways in which each of the teachers revised the curriculum during the school year or planned to revise the curriculum for the following school year. One example of a type of revision was to increase the duration of a session from, for example,

1 day to 2 days, in order to add more to the curriculum. Likewise, revisions were made to remove part of the curriculum that, for example, a teacher felt was not effective.

Moreover, as mentioned previously, new topics were added to address current event issues related to race that emerged during a particular quarter of the school year. Overall, however, there were two main ways that each teacher revised the curriculum: adding content to a session and changing the sequence of sessions.

Revising to include additional content. In this section, I include two examples of sessions that demonstrate my findings on the first main type of revisions each of the teachers made to the curriculum. These sessions were revised because some of the teachers determined they needed to include more content than what was originally planned. These two sessions are examples of parts of the curriculum that were revised

140

during the teaching of the course. Because Session 1, “Exploring Idenities and Labels,” was identified by each teacher as an essential way to open up the curriculum to students at each of the grade levels, I discuss these revisions and provide details about how this session evolved and unfolded across the quarters. Then, because Session 5, “Privilege,

Supremacy, and Becoming an Ally,” was a point of contention during this study among the teachers, I discuss this session as well and provide details about the ways the teachers adjusted it in their courses.

Session 1: “Exploring Identities and Labels”—Initial Plans. Originally, Erin,

Jamie, and I developed this session to unfold in the following manner, using the session framework we designed.

First, students responded to the following questions in their notebooks: What is a label? What are stereotypes? How are labels and stereotypes connected? Students spent

5-10 minutes writing their ideas about these initial questions. Jamie employed the think- pair-share strategy and encouraged students to discuss their responses in partnerships.

Erin and Sonja did not. Their students’ ideas remained in their journals at first.

Next, students viewed the digital text titled The Lab Decoy: A Portrait Session with a Twist (3:17). This digital text explores the perceptions of the character of a person once a label has been applied through a photo shoot of a man assigned six different labels photographed by six different photographers. After viewing the video, students responded to the following guiding questions: How can labels be harmful and contribute to biases?

How can labels be useful? Can we use labels to understand people rather than to judge people? Students answered these questions in their notebooks first. Then they discussed

141

them along with the digital text with a partner. In each of our courses, we then moved our classes into a full class discussion that lasted 10-15 minutes.

After this discussion, students explored their identities. They named the ways in which they identitied and created a small poster. Erin, Jamie, and Sonja modeled with their own poster, which included identities such as race, gender, roles (ex. teacher, mother), and the like. After students created their posters, they moved into a circle holding the posters facing outward. We prompted students to move around the circle to have short conversations with those who had similar identities and different identities as prompted by their teacher. For example, Initiate a conversation with someone with whom you ‘share a difference’ to discuss that difference. Midway through the activity, students were asked to stop to discuss the following: What judgments did you make based on appearances before you read someone’s label? What wasn’t on your poster that could have been? Students were given the option of revising their poster if they wanted to. Erin continued the “meet and greet” portion of this activity. Jamie and Sonja did not due to time purposes.

The session concluded by each of the teachers providing an opportunity for the students in their class to debrief and look ahead to the next session. The full class came together to discuss the following: What made this successful? What part of the activity was not as successful as it could have been? How can we nurture trust and continue to have meaningful conversations? We each recorded our students’ responses, which we announced would help to inform the next session: Establishing Guidelines and

Expectations.

142

During Session 2, students continued to think more about identities and labels, including discussing stereotypes.

Session 1 revisions. During the second and third quarters, revisions were made to this session on identities and labels that would lead to a major overhaul by the end of the year. In some cases, an activity was swapped out for a new one. Overall, however, there were several new additions, including glossary work, poetry, scenario analyses, and the incorporation of more digital texts. Essentially, each of the teachers attempted to gauge which activities and experiences worked best with their grade-level of students. During this process, they each determined that additional content as well as time was needed for this session.

For example, Reid added a discussion question to the start of this session. Small groups of four or five students worked together to discuss: What might be the difference between an “identity” and a “label”? As students discussed this question, Reid recalled asking them to “complicate, consider, co-author.” I asked Reid about this and he shared his thoughts about the developmental process of adolescents: “Middle-school students don’t always do well with complexity. They misinterpret.” Reid recalled repeating these three Cs almost as a mantra across the year to encourage students to push beyond the obvious and to consider ideas from different perspectives.

Another addition was the defining and discussion of specific terms. Erin, Jamie, and Reid added definitions to the terms such as identity and label, and students were asked to write them in the glossary section of their notebooks. An example of the definition of identity, shown in Figure 1, seemed to draw attention to the complexities

143

around this term that helped students understand that identities involve both the ways in which we see ourselves and the ways others see us.

Figure 1. Defining “identity”

Instead of the identity/label poster, Reid invited students to write more in depth about their identities using the definition he provided. The students wrote “I Am…” poems after Reid modeled his (Figure 2). Jamie’s class wrote “I Am” poems in addition to creating the identity/label posters as initially planned in the curriculum.

Figure 2. Reid’s “I Am…” poem

144

Students in both Reid’s and Jamie’s classes were invited to share all or part of their writing in partnerships. Reid reported that most students chose to share all of their writing. He also shared, however, that much of the writing revealed students’ interests and hobbies (ex. “A soccer player” or “A comic book geek”) and that students were not ready or perhaps willing to take greater risks. Jamie found greater success with her sixth grade students who took opportunities to explore and reveal their cultural and racial identities and they each wanted to share all of their writing.

Erin and Reid added “The Label Game” to this session (see Figure 3). This game was based on sources accessed such as “Facing History, Facing Ourselves” and

“Teaching Tolerance.” Reid described this activity as a way to get the students up and moving: “They had fun because it felt like a game. But it also got them thinking about how they’d feel if they were stuck with something they didn’t like.”

Figure 3. The “Label Game”

145

Reid recalled using words like intelligent, bossy, uncooperative, cruel, tall, creative, and bully that students decided they either liked and wanted to keep or wanted to get rid of. Interestingly, Erin reported that her students did not take this activity seriously: “It was like a joke to them and they weren’t concerned about trading some of the less desirable labels.”

Further, each of the teachers incorporated discussions of race-based scenarios they each created to help their students explore the concept of identities and how they can be used in harmful and hurtful ways. An example of one scenario is presented in Figure

4. Reid explained that he developed the scenarios based on the actual experiences of some of his former students. He shared that the scenarios were most impactful on students because “They provided a realistic snapshot of what racism looks like in their everyday lives—in their school and with their peers.”

Figure 4. Race-based Scenario #1

146

Finally, additional digital texts were added to this session by some of the teachers to further support students’ understandings about labels and stereotypes. For example, some students were invited to read texts on www.economist.com such as “The Last

Acceptable Prejudice: Why Bad Jokes Are Still Made About People Who Speak

Differently” to explore the ways in which accents and jokes are also ways in which people can be labeled.

Reflections on Session 1 revisions. In general, the revisions made to Session 1 were an example of how each of the teachers seemed to push students to think more about identities and labels—their pros and cons and the overall complexity around using them. This revised session is also an example of one in which there was an increase not only in content, but also in duration, from one day to two or even three days, depending on the teacher. This increase in time as well as content seemed to be a way for the teachers to provide additional time for students to think about these issues. However, these revisions resulted in mixed success. The sixth graders seemed to be particularly receptive to applying these concepts to explore their own identities and also considering how one’s identities can both positively and negatively affect one’s life. However, it seemed harder for the seventh and eighth graders to open up and explore the concept of identities, particularly regarding their own. Yet, both Erin’s and Reid’s reflections showed their views that their students needed additional opportunities to both reflect and apply the concepts than the initial curriculum provided.

Session 5: “Privilege, Supremacy, and Becoming an Ally”—Initial plans. This session yielded varying results as reported by the teachers. Unlike other sessions, this one did not begin with students reflecting in their notebooks. Instead, students entered the

147

classroom and took part in an activity that I had read about online, posted by an anonymous high school teacher who wanted to teach his students about privilege. We developed the session to unfold in the following way.

First, desks were moved to the perimeter of the classroom prior to students entering. Chairs were organized into five or six rows. A wastebasket was placed in the front of the room and each student was given a plain sheet of white paper to crumble.

Then students were asked to try to throw their papers into the wastebasket from their seats. The students in the front clearly had an advantage to making the shot. After this activity, the students discussed the idea of advantages and fairness through a 5- to

8-minute class discussion.

Then, students reflected on the following question in their notebooks: What privileges do you have? Students were encouraged to make a list of their privileges and were given examples such as: to eat out at restaurants, to go to a good school, and so on.

After spending a few minutes creating their lists, students then watched a digital text,

Why Does Privilege Make People So Angry (4:51). This text explores the concept of privilege in different scenarios and explains why people can become defensive when hearing the word privilege.

After viewing the text, students engaged in the think-pair-share strategy. They answered the following questions in their notebooks: Can you think of situations where people have advantages over others who do not? Where have you seen this operating in history? In current events? In your day-to-day life? Then students had a few minutes to discuss their ideas with a partner.

148

Next, students took a “Privilege Inventory” using the handout in Figure 5. We developed this list based on the work of educator Peggy McIntosh and author of

Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. Although students might have generated some ideas in the lists in their notebooks, we wanted to make sure our students had the opportunity to think about privileges they may not have listed. For example, “I can look in mainstream media and see wide, fair representation of people who look like me,” “I never think twice about calling the police when trouble occurs,” and “Schools in my community teach about my race and heritage and present it in positive ways” were privileges we each noted most students did not brainstorm in their notebooks. Students were asked to place a checkmark next to each statement on the graphic organizer that they believed was a privilege of theirs. Students could also add privileges they felt they had if they were not listed.

Figure 5. “Privilege Inventory”

149

Students then heard directly from Peggy McIntosh by watching a brief video of her discussing her work on privilege. After this, students revisited their notebooks and the

“Privilege Inventory” handout to review their lists. We asked students to put checkmarks next to the privileges that they had determined they may have, in part, because of their race and to add any additional privileges they thought of as a result of talking to their peers and listening to Peggy McIntosh. Finally, we provided additional independent reflection time by asking students to think about and respond to the following question in their notebooks: How did taking the “Privilege Inventory” make you feel? We facilitated a discussion to address the pitfalls of making generalizations and possible feelings of guilt that may have surfaced. We each shared that such discussions occurred during each quarter of the school year and students felt uneasy with their realizations about their privileges.

The session ended with an opportunity for students to debrief the lesson on privilege, but also to look ahead. We engaged students in the following question: What does it mean to be an ally? During a focus group interview, we each expressed that we felt this was a particularly powerful way to end this session. The concept of privilege was revealing and conflicting for many students. Further, we noted that students had been asking across previous sessions when would they be able to do something about the issue of racism. Concluding Session 5 by turning toward initial conversations about allyship was a powerful and positive way to wrap up an emotionally charged session.

Session 5 revisions. Although Jamie reported that she did not change the original plan for this session with her sixth grade students, Erin, Reid, and I revised this session in several ways. Some of these revisions were made prior to teaching the session during the

150

first quarter and were specific to the “Wastebasket Shot” activity. Erin reported that she continued to revise this session each quarter. The additions they made to the content were done to raise the stakes of the main activity and drive home the concept of privilege.

For example, to place emphasis on the importance of making the shot, I asked students to write their names on their paper before they crumpled it. Then, I informed students that whoever made the shot would get a roll of Smarties candy. Five students in my first quarter course made the shot and received candy; these students were seated in the first and second rows. One of my students unwrapped his roll of candy and shared it with two of his peers who were seated in the last row. When I asked him why he shared his winnings, he explained that the activity was not fair. I encouraged him to say more.

He continued, stating that he only made the shot because he was in the middle of the first row, directly in front of the wastebasket, and his friends in the back did not because they were too far away. At this point, I gave every student in the classroom a roll of Smarties, which I had always intended to do. Then, we continued our disussion about advantages, fairness, and privilege, launched by my students’ comments about the activity. The lesson continued to unfold as originally planned.

Erin made a similar addition but added a few twists for her eighth graders. She pulled one student aside before he entered the classroom and asked if he would assist her with the session. He agreed. The session unfolded much like to mine except the student

Erin spoke to previously purposefully did not receive a piece of paper to crumple.

Therefore, he did not have a chance to make the shot because he never had access to the opportunity. The concept of access was content that Erin found important to add and emphasize in this session. During the third quarter, Erin tweaked the lesson again. This

151

time, she distributed papers with students’ names already printed on them. Before they crumpled them, Erin asked if everyone received a piece of paper. The student she had secretly spoken to before the class about the activity raised his hand to signal he did not receive paper. Erin shared that she responded out loud so all students could hear, “I’m sorry but I guess you’re just not able to have a shot.” During the fourth quarter, Erin included all of these tweaks and an additional one. She randomly selected a few students and said loud enough for the entire class to hear, “You can stand up to take your shot.”

Each quarter, Erin gave candy at first to only the students who made the shot, but then to every student in the class as they all discussed the concept of privilege.

Erin reported that during each quarter, her students responded similarly to the wastebasket activity itself. They stated that it was unfair because only those closest to the basket could actually make the shot and some students got to stand, while one student did not get a chance to make the shot at all because of not receiving paper. The receiving or not receiving of candy, according to Erin, “didn’t sway” her students. They were more concerned with fairness around the conditions for taking the shot. However, Erin reported that the real challenge was helping students connect this activity to privilege.

Erin explained that during the debrief discussion, there was mostly resistance to how privilege occurs in the world.

Not one of the students saw what the activity was related to until we debriefed it. They said things like, yeah ok we get it but…. Some described the activity as oversimplified. One student announced that this was a collossal waste of paper.

For the most part, Erin explained that most of her students resisted the notion of privilege and expressed that they felt there was little validity to some people having an advantge over others because of race today. For a few of her students, however, Erin shared that

152

the session shifted their thinking. She stated, “They were more thoughtful and said things like I never thought about it that way.”

Erin’s reflection on this session on privilege provided insight into her thinking about its place in the curriculum and the work she believed needed to occur prior to this session. Also, Erin’s overall experience with eighth grade students provided insight into what she had learned about the racial-justice curriculum for predominantly White middle- school students. I discuss this further in the following chapters.

Reid shared changes to this lesson that included additional opportunities for students to relate to the concept of privilege. For example, he engaged students in conversations about digital texts and metaphorical lessons such as right-hand/left-hand privilege and connected this to hair privilege. He explained that while students seemed to respond best to these types of metaphor-driven lessons, he also found them to be problematic.

When we’re talking about something new, they’d say it’s like that left- hand/right-hand privilege as opposed to that’s like the hair privilege we talked about with race. That is something I’m keeping my ear out for. I think they like the lessons that they feel least threatened by and that they actually may have a take away from.

Reid continued to make revisions to this session, in particular in response to his noticings and wonderings. He considered whether it was problematic for students to be drawn to this type of content where they “feel least threatened” if part of the goal of the curriculum is getting students to understand what others might be feeling. He also wondered if one way to achieve this involved adding content that encouraged students to connect to their own instances of how they have felt about issues with which they have personally dealt.

153

Reflections on Session 5 revisions. Looking back across our work on this session, it seemed that broaching the concept of privilege with our White students was one into which all of the teachers put considerable thought. Some of us determined that helping students truly grasp this concept required additions to the curriculum. These additions tended to spark a visceral reaction within students. In one regard, these additions helped students to recognize unfairness, inequity, and access. However, for some students, the challenge was connecting these concepts to racial disparities. Some students, particularly in the eighth grade, rejected this notion. They became uncomfortable applying privilege to themselves, which required thinking deeply about unearned entitlements simply because they were White.

Further discussion of these events occurred during a group conversation about revising the sequence of sessions in the curriculum.

Revising to change the sequence of sessions. As we looked back on our initial decisions about the scope and sequence of the curriculum, we raised questions about its effectiveness. This led to my findings on the second type of revisions we each made to the curriculum. Hindsight provided foresight as we discussed not only the changes made as we taught our courses, but how we felt the curriculum should be revised in general, specifically for our grade level, for the following school year.

With our initial work spread out around us, along with our teacher journals and artifacts from our teaching of these courses from the school year that had just ended, we wrestled with and debated over the order of the sessions we had planned. Erin, Jamie, and

I used post-its to demonstrate our revised thinking about the order we each believed the

154

sessions should occur in the curriculum. Figures 6, 7, and 8 show our reordering of topics and sessions.

Figure 6. Jamie’s reordering of session topics

Figure 7. Sonja’s reordering of Figure 8. Erin’s reordering of session topics session topics

155

Each of our post-it reorderings launched a debate about the importance of topics and order of sessions. There were ideas we all agreed on, but mostly areas where we disagreed. For example, we each felt the lesson on Identities and Labels was an effective way to begin the course because it allowed students to talk about themselves, to think about who they are, and to ease into a curriculum on race. There was also agreement that the lesson on colorblindness should be moved further up in the curriculum than where we had originally placed it. Although we had similar views on these topics, there was little agreement on the rest of the curriculum sessions and topics. However, what we all agreed on was that the sequence of sessions we had originally planned did not work as effectively as we had envisioned it would. The following data include each teacher’s rationale for some of the curricular changes they planned to make the following school year.

Jamie.

I’ll start with identity because I think it’s important for the kids to think about who they are. And I had privilege as next because now that you’ve talked about who you are and your identity, I think it’s important for student to think about what are the privileges that come with that. And then I had stereotypes kind of along with that because what are the stereotypes that come with those identities.

Jamie discussed the changes she had planned to make for the following school year. She moved the session on privilege, which the teachers originally planned to cover on Day 5 of the course, up to Day 2 or 3, depending on the time needed for the session on labels.

Jamie felt it was important for her sixth graders to think about the connection between their identities and their privileges sooner in the curriculum.

156

Sonja.

Allyship is something I feel that should be discussed right from the start. The kids kept asking when do we get to the part where we do something about this? They need to learn all of these other topics, but they need to know that in this course the thread that runs through it is how they can make a difference. What is race is really important. To me, it’s important to this phenomenon to kids right away. Here is how the world works. We see it. But now let’s understand what it really is. And I’m not sure if what I mean by this is to go through all of those lessons around what is race from PBS, which I loved, but definitely I feel strongly that there needs to be a conversation that helps kids understand that race is socially constructed. That this is all made up. Completely made up.

From my perspective, waiting until Session 5 to discuss allyship was too late. Further, the session on What Is Race? was planned for Day 3 of the curriculum. Although I was considering a change in the activities associated with this session, I chose to keep this lesson in its originally planned position in order to debunk the myth of race that I believed my seventh grade students took as truth.

Erin.

Colorblindness, I moved that up because I feel like that makes defining race important; it makes it relevant. Because I talk about with students all the time of eliminating unicorns and rainbows, you know, the “Why can’t everybody just get along and be nice to each other?” Unicorns and rainbows. It’s not real. So talking about colorblindness and how that’s harmful, I think, makes talking about what is race relevant.

Here, it seemed that Erin believed her eighth graders needed a more direct approach, one that did not attempt to sugarcoat the realities of racism and would make understandings about race and racism more relevant. Erin shared that she made this particular change in the sequence of lessons during the third and fourth quarters. She moved the colorblindness lesson up in the progression from where it was originally positioned on

Day 9 to Day 2. However, I noted a contradiction regarding the session on privilege as

Erin continued:

157

I added “unconscious bias” because I don’t feel like there’s a separate category for this and I think there needs to be. Once you realize your unconscious biases, I think it’s more palatable to talk about becoming an ally first before privilege because then you don’t have as many questions about feeling guilty or responsible, which came up.

Erin suggested adding a topic to the curriculum that she believed was a mishap on our part when we developed the curriculum. Also, she proposed moving the session on privilege from Day 5 to Day 6. Jamie and I disagreed about the delay and felt the session on privilege should be moved up. Jamie moved it to Day 2 and I moved it to Day 3.

Jamie shared, “Feeling uncomfortable comes with the territory.”

Later, I made note of this part of the discussion in my researcher journal as a point of dissension among the teachers and wondered if our racialized identities were at play.

To bring about greater clarity of our stances, I considered the racialized issues that were emerging (Milner, 2007). Jamie felt strongly that the session on privilege needed to occur as early as Day 2 of the course. I suggested that the session on privilege be moved to Day

3. But Erin expressed the need for a new topic, “unconscious bias,” that would serve as a bridge to the topic of privilege. She used the phrase “more palatable” for her students and described this topic as having the potential for lessening feelings of guilt or responsibility that she reported students expressed during the session on privilege. Erin had this to offer about her rationale:

It’s interesting because when we talked about putting privilege early in the line-up, I’m wondering how much of my line-up was influenced by the receptiveness of the eighth graders. Because they are certainly not ready for privilege sooner in the curriculum.

Erin reflected on how the “receptiveness” of the eighth graders had shaped her perspective on the scope and sequence of the curriculum.

158

For some of the teachers, there was concern about the fragility of their White students and the discomfort this work might raise. As a result, they proposed delaying this session on privilege to, perhaps, mitigate these reactions. For other teachers, it was uncomfortable to center their students’ feelings of uneasiness and they felt there should not be hesitations or limitations upon this topic. For Jamie and me, privilege was a topic we felt needed to be addressed early, perhaps knowing that, from our own backgrounds and experiences, when White people are uncomfortable, the silencing of people of color often results.

Later, during an individual interview, I asked Reid about his position on this debate and he replied:

I don’t think this should happen too early in the curriculum because they just can’t see it, the way that who they are gives them an advantage. It turns them off if done too soon.

It was interesting to consider how our identities perhaps influenced our thinking about the concept of privilege. Although he believed this session was essential in the curriculum,

Reid named the concept of privilege as one to which he believed his students, as well as his colleagues, had the strongest reaction. I wondered about the role of Whiteness in

Erin’s and Reid’s perspectives on discussions about privilege with their White students.

To Erin and Reid, both White teachers, it seemed that the concept of privilege should be delayed and approached carefully, so as not to cause discomfort for their White students.

Similarly, I wondered about how being educators of color informed the decisions Jamie and I were making around this session on privilege. I viewed delays in the session as a protective approach that centered Whiteness—what I thought was the antithesis of what our work on developing the curriculum and teaching the courses was about.

159

Another debate we wrestled with involved when or whether to address the topic of supremacy in the curriculum. Although we had originally planned Session 5 to include conversations about privilege, supremacy, and allyship, none of the teachers reported discussing supremacy directly during this session, perhaps due to student discomfort. It was interesting to reflect on this alongside of the reordering we had done as we discussed curriculum revisions. In fact, when the teachers included the topic of supremacy in their session reordering, Erin and I moved it from its orginal location, Session 5, to Session

10—the last session before the racial-justice projects started. Jamie moved it to Session 6.

Erin remarked, “With privilege I added blindspots. And I separated privileges and supremacy because I think they’re two completely different things.” Jaime shared that she discussed supremacy during Session 10: Symbols of Hate and Racism. Erin and I did as well. We also each discussed supremacy during the first session of the first quarter in connection with the White Nationalist events in Charlottesville, Virginia that occurred

3 weeks prior to the start of the school year and the courses.

In addition to the concept of supremacy causing discomfort for our students, it seemed that the concept of supremacy also caused discomfort for us as educators, particularly in this predominantly White school district. Therefore, it seemed to have been raised only in connection to individual acts of hate and recommended for discussion later in the curriculum. I continued to wonder about the consequences of our hesitancy and noted that this was worth continuing to puzzle through and adjust for in the curriculum.

As we reflected on our initial work of developing the curriculum, the ways it was revised during the course, and the debates that were raised yet unresolved, we continued

160

to discuss what we were hoping to accomplish in a course about race. Erin’s reflection on this was as follows:

At first, I remember just writing topics of specific lessons in my notebook, which was really about what do we teach. But what do we hope to accomplish was the bigger one. Even though there was a lot on our plates, I just never allowed myself to think I would change mindsets. That felt too overwhelming. I just hoped to effect change in my students. To open the door. But they’d have to decide to walk through it.

Erin reminded us of the ways she specifically tried to manage what she perceived as unrealistic expectations, but to instead focus on how our work could “open the door” to the work of racial-justice through the development and teaching of the curriculum.

Reflections on curriculum revisions. Reflecting on the effectiveness of the curriculum we developed brought to light several important issues. Overall, however, I concluded that an essential question we seemed to be grappling with was: For whom is this racial-justice curriculum for? We wondered whether, based on the demographics of our students, we had developed a racial-justice curriculum or, essentially, a “racial-justice curriculum for White students.” If it was the later, how did this shape every decision we made beginning with the development of the curriculum and including the ways we revised it? I examined our ideas about this across the data. Focus group and individual interviews demonstrated our thinking about the audience for the curriculum we had developed and its effects on all of our students.

Jamie: My students of color don’t participate. But all of my White students have their hands up, ready to go. So I’ve been thinking all year about why is this working this way. This is something we need to also think about when creating curriculum. Who is our audience? Who are we reaching? Who are we placing on the outside? This whole thing is about making sure that everyone feels included but are we?

161

Sonja: Is what’s needed in schools to support teaching about race, whether it’s the curriculum or support from administrators, is it the same in White spaces as in more racially-diverse spaces? Erin: No, I don’t think it is. Sonja: So then by design, this is for a White audience. Erin: Absolutely, and I think it should be. Sonja: It should be because these are the kids before us. And as a consequence of that, you know Jamie talked a lot about her students of color, she’s been wrestling with their lack of participation and are they uncomfortable and what does it mean to be “the topic” in a White space?

I wanted to explore whether the teachers believed the curriculum they developed was for White students and, consequently, the effects on their students of color. Each of the teachers shared having very few students of color in their courses because there were few students of color in their school district. Erin expressed that while one of her students who identified as Syrian and Muslim was very vocal about the stereotypes she and her family experienced, many of her students of color were quiet. She wondered whether this was a function of their personalities or their discomfort with the curriculum. I wondered, more specifically, how much of it was a function of the personality of a student of color in a White-dominated space. Jamie added:

Yes, yes that’s my note in my teacher journal. Have they been feeling on the outside for so long? That this is who they are? They cope in silence. How much of this silence is the idea of being constantly uncomfortable in this White space?

Reid weighed in on this issue. He agreed that by nature, the curriculum and the revisions we had made were geared purposefully toward White students, as this was our audience.

He added:

I think it’s something we definitely need to consider. Because there’s so much research on the benefits of students of color having a safe space to talk. The issue we’ll face is not having enough teachers of color to lead those spaces. But maybe we can turn to members of the community for support.

162

This particular debate galvanized us to shift from considering the experiences of our White students with the curriculum we developed and revised, to the experiences of our students of color in our courses. We grappled with the realization that the racial- justice curriculum we had developed in our predominantly White spaces was possibly a double-edged sword. In the best and broadest sense, we believed it had the potential to cut through the veil of silence around race and racism in our White school district. Its effects, we hoped, included the potential of our students learning to disrupt racism, individually and systemically, as they grew into adulthood. However, we wondered if an unintended effect was that the curriculum and the revisions we made pierced the spirit of students of color. Was it possibly harming them due to the emotional baggage they already carried being “other” in their White school district and now being part of a course where they were essentially the topic?

Consideration and discussion of this issue raised more questions than we resolved.

These questions included: Are affinity group spaces needed when teaching about race and racism? Should racial-justice courses be affinity group-based all of the time or for a limited amount of time? Or, is a separate racial-justice curriculum needed for students of color and what would it entail?

What Does a Racial-Justice Curriculum Entail?

Throughout the data, I used the teachers’ reflections to continue to refine my ideas about the purpose of a racial-justice curriculum and what it entails. In Chapter IV, I explored the teachers’ sociocultural backgrounds and professional experiences and the ways they contribute to their understandings of what the racial-justice curriculum is. An

163

examination of each of the teachers’ perspectives revealed that it involves helping students to recognize and examine racism and the ways it exists in their everyday lives.

This was consistently a curriculuar focus of the teachers as they developed the curriculum.

In this chapter, the data suggest more about what a racial-justice curriculum entails. As a result of reflecting on the curriculum that was developed and the ways the teachers believed it should be revised, in addition to their reflections in Chapter IV, I conclude that a racial-justice curriculum is both fluid and malleable.

A racial-justice curriculum is one that is fluid—where teachers have considered what the topics might be based on the backgrounds of their students, but their order can be dramatically altered in response to what students need. Further, a racial-justice curriculum is malleable in order to address not only the specific age range of middle- school students, but also the current events related to race and racism that occur during the course of the school year.

Reflections on Developing a Racial-Justice Curriculum

In discussing the major findings in this chapter on the two main types of revisions the teachers made to the racial-justice curriculum, I noted numerous issues we recalled grappling with during the process of developing the curriculum for our courses. This included determining not only the specific topics and sequence of the sessions, but also wrestling with the purpose of the curriculum and what we hoped to accomplish.

Moreover, as we began to teach the curriculum, new issues were raised, including considering the experiences of students of color who were, it seemed, consciously left out

164

as a result of developing a curriculum focused on the experiences of our White students. I also noted the ways our racialized identities seemed to come into play and how this seemed to influence the revisions we made.

Across the data, I noted a variety of ways we each worked to improve the curriculum. We revised it by adding more content, changing the order of topics, speeding up or slowing down, and researching new texts. Ultimately, we continually revisioned the ways the curriculum and course could go, again and again, as we taught across the quarters of the school year. Each teacher is a confident and skilled facilitator of talk in their classrooms who had learned to trust his or her instincts and lean into risks that other kinds of teachers might avoid.

The development of the curriculum had been a journey with different challenges and lessons we learned along the way. As educators and activists who had taken up the charge for teaching about racial justice, we also reflected on the pitfalls of this work, specifically within the context of where we teach. Together, we tried to unpack some of the practical strategies we had planned for, and discovered along the way how that helped us to facilitate courageous conversations and deepen our practice. In essence, we discovered that the curriculum we had developed prior to teaching the course gave us wings. Yet, it was not until we taught the courses, and the curriculum took flight, that we could observe its effectiveness and its flaws. Looking across the data, I observed that it was not until we moved further and further away from following the prescribed structure we developed for teaching these courses, and instead trusted in our own abilities, that the curriculum began to soar.

165

In the following chapter, I discuss what the teachers reported they learned from their experiences teaching about race and racism.

166

Chapter VI

TEACHERS’ REFLECTIONS ON TEACHING ABOUT RACE AND RACISM

As I looked across the data, I noted several key findings around the teaching of the racial-justice courses. These findings included the role of digital texts. Specifically, I considered what each of the teachers learned about the usefulness of digital texts when teaching about race and racism. Realizations about the usefulness of digital texts led to the second finding discussed in this chapter, that is, the distinct facilitation and instructional methods that each teacher seemed to employ in order to teach about race.

These methods developed across the school year during the teaching of the courses.

Then, I discuss a third finding, which is essentially each of our perspectives around the questions we believed were beneficial for all educators to consider when developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum. Finally, I continue to reflect on how this research, specifically around teaching the courses, provides additional insights into the purpose and goals of racial-justice curriculum and instruction.

The Usefulness of Digital Texts

One of the most salient ways that each of the teachers worked to call attention to the realities of racism in their students’ everyday lives was through the use of digital texts that captured such issues. Their reflections about the usefulness of digital texts were an

167

important finding that emerged from the data. In the following sections, I provide a window into the decision-making processes of each teacher specifically around the role of digital texts in their courses.

Jamie—Using Digital Texts to Expose Blindspots

Across the data, I observed that Jamie discussed using digital texts to help her expose what she frequently described as her students’ blindspots. She discussed, in particular, using digital texts to both expose her students to the type of discrimination people of color face every day and expose the blindspots she believed prevented her students from recognizing such issues.

A discussion with Jamie revealed a specific example of the use of digital texts in this way. Jamie recalled a tense conversation with her sixth graders after viewing video clips about the highly publicized 2018 arrest of two Black men at a Starbucks in

Philadelphia. She discussed her students’ reactions to digital texts they had accessed during their class:

Jamie: The kids were all talking and they were saying, oh my god that was so racist! And one girl raised her hand and said something to the effect of you know what, it was not racist what happened. Those men were probably in there and they weren’t purchasing something and they were probably loud. And they were probably being aggressive. And they were probably acting in a certain way and because of the way they were acting is why the manager had to come over and tell them to stop doing what they were doing and then call the police because they weren’t listening. She had created this entire scenario. And I let her speak, and you could have heard a pin drop in that room. Because I know that kids were thinking, what the heck is she talking about. And some of them may have been agreeing with her. Sonja: And I’m sure all of them were like, “What is [Jamie] going to say?” Jamie: Absolutely! All of the kids were listening. Everybody's watching. And I let her speak. I did not interrupt her. When she finished, I said, “That’s an interesting perspective. Can I ask you who ‘they’ are?” And she said, “The two men.” I said, “Okay, you said they were being loud, perhaps they were

168

being rude, perhaps they were being unruly. Can you tell me where you heard that?” She said, “No, no, no, I didn’t see that anywhere in the video but you know, that’s how they are.” I knew what she was headed for. She was headed toward a stereotype of people of color. About, Black men in particular.

Jamie’s attempts to disrupt her student’s overuse of pronouns as a thinly-vieled shield for stereotyping in this conversation was noted during our discussion. Although she reported that her major goal in using digital texts was to make racism visible to her students,

Jamie’s experience revealed the challenges of exposing racism to some students who, even when presented with information from reputable news sources, continued to rely on stereotypes they had come to believe as truth. Jamie recalled thinking about what her next steps would be.

I asked the class to think back to the lesson on labels and on stereotypes. And I said to the student it seems like you may be putting a label or a stereotype on these Black men. And then we talked about the barista. There were students who were like, well why would she do that? They were speaking in defense of her. And I said, yes, why would she? Is it possible that maybe the barista had an issue with two Black men sitting there?

Jamie attempted to use digital texts in a variety of ways: to ground the conversation in facts and also to encourage students to think about and discuss this event from multiple perspectives. Jamie remarked that her students regularly engaged digital texts, particularly video and audio clips, twice. This decision seemed to be her attempt to encourage her students to discuss issues of race and racism, such as this Starbucks event, with accuracy and specificity. By accessing video clips of the news and listening to the audio of the 911 call twice, students could identify what the barista said and evaluate her actions based on these facts. Jamie continued to reflect on the conversation that had occured in her class.

169

Like right away, it seemed like for some of the students, the onus was on the men to defend themselves. It was like the barista was completely devoid of any doubt about her actions. So that made me realize that in that conversation there were other kids who were unsure. And were giving the barista the benefit of the doubt. Rather than giving these two men the benefit of the doubt.

Continuing to analyze digital texts and discuss this event allowed other opinions to surface that were similar to that of the student Jamie first spoke about. In this way, digital texts exposed students to racism in the world around them, but also exposed viewpoints of the students that were tricky and not easily refuted by the digital texts they engaged with. Jamie wrapped up the discussion with her students by challenging them to consider their own biases and how this can influence their understanding of an issue.

One of the students raised his hand and said, you know, I never thought of it that way. I didn’t realize that maybe it was the barista. I told the class that I know this is uncomfortable to hear. But I think we have to start thinking about, when things happen, what are we adding to these stories and why.

Jamie’s purpose of using digital texts in her course was not only to make racism visible to her sixth grade students whom she believed did not have many opportunities to look at the world through the lens of race, but also to expose their blindspots and to disrupt dominant perspectives about groups of people.

Erin—Rethinking the Use of Digital Texts

Although Erin reflected on the ways she viewed digital texts as integral to the curriculum initially, continued discussions demonstrated that her ideas changed as she began teaching the courses. The data revealed the change in Erin’s thinking about the role of digital texts in teaching about racial justice—from being a staple in the curriculum to, at times, being an obstacle.

170

We thought a lot about the materials and what the students would find engaging. So using digital texts was a big part of it. But each quarter, I relied less on digital texts. I feel like the older the kids get, the more passive they become in relationship with digital media. I wanted to move away from it. I didn’t want them to just be comfortable watching.

For Erin, it seemed that anchoring her sessions around digital texts resulted in less engagement with the ideas and concepts she had hoped students would learn and discuss.

She shared that at times, the use of digital texts stifled the kinds of conversations she envisioned students having. In my researcher journal, I noted my wonderings about why

Erin had changed her ideas about the importance of using digital texts in the curriculum from when we developed the curriculum. I looked for evidence of this across several interviews where Erin reflected on what seemed to be her learnings about the importance of digital texts.

I think it’s important. But I found that as I adapted the curriculum, I did not have a digital text everyday. And one of the things that I didn’t like about relying heavily upon that is that it’s passive. And I thought about engaging them in different ways. They’re comfortable watching. And I didn’t always like that. I think it’s important. But I found myself at times wanting to get away from that, a little bit. Needing a break.

It was interesting to note the ways Erin continued to associate digital texts with passivity.

Initially, she thought the texts would be engaging to students, but seemed to discover that her eighth graders needed a different approach. I raised this with Erin and Jamie during a focus group discussion about the importance of digital texts when teaching about racial justice.

Jamie: They’d be like oh, remember we had that conversation about stereotypes? Check out this video. It was a way that I was able to work with the kids outside of the course and to use their knowledge. And I would take their contributions around digital texts and it would become part of the curriculum and for the next year it will be too.

171

Erin: I definitely didn’t find that with the eighth grade. I feel the older they get, the more passive they become. And that video and that interaction with digital media becomes different on a recreational level. So given the chance, they’re not searching for racial-justice videos, they’re doing something completely different. So it’s interesting the developmental differences. The eighth graders especially are just so engaged in digital media that I found that we needed a break from it.

For Jamie, recommending and sharing digital texts were ways for her students to be actively involved in their course and to establish themselves as knowledge-holders.

Students were empowered to recommend digital texts, teach their friends, and, as a result, steer the direction of the curriculum. Erin, however, remained consistent in how she described the digital texts in the curriculum as a passive experience for her eighth graders that was not always effective in addressing the goals of the curriculum. Much like the ways the receptiveness of the eighth graders seemed to influence Erin’s thinking about the scope and sequence of the curriculum, this also seemed to shape her beliefs around the use of digital texts.

In numerous ways, Erin discussed the resistance of her students to accept some of the content presented in digital texts as examples of racism. One specific example she shared occurred when she used a clip from the ABC show, What Would You Do? In this text, a young White man uses a variety of tools such as a hammer, saw, and clippers on the chain around a bike in broad daylight as numerous White people pass by and observe his actions. They stop, stare, and even ask if the bike belongs to him. The young man, who is acting undercover for the purposes of this experiment, admits to several of the

White passers-by that the bike is not his and he is trying get the lock off. None of the observers interfere or call the police. Then, a young African American male actor replaces the White actor. Although he is dressed similarly to the White actor and is about

172

the same age, those passing by approach him within seconds and demand to know what he is doing and whether the bike belongs to him. Some even begin to take pictures using their phone for evidence. They scream at him to stop and the police are called immediately.

Erin believed this digital text would spark a thoughtful discussion about assumptions, privilege, and racism. However, she shared, “They kept saying, well is that really racism? We don’t know. Maybe it’s just a coincidence.” To mitigate the resistance she experienced from her students, Erin found that it was more effective to use digital texts less frequently. Although she reported that her students expressed a desire to include more current events in their course about racism, she found that it was effective to incorporate historical events to have these kinds of conversations. For example, she described a successful experience where students had viewed the movie Hidden Figures.

Erin found that her students were more willing to engage in conversations about racism and it was easier for them to apply some of the racial-literacy skills they had learned, such as identifying specific parts of the movie as examples of institutitional or interpersonal racism. I asked Erin why she thought there seemed to be less resistance from her students around digital texts and discussions about the historical past.

Because they are part of the current and they don’t want to own this. Nobody wanted the racist label. Middle-school students are steeped in what their peers think about them and how they judge them. I believe, however, that internally, they were processing the content different than they were expressing it.

For Erin, the use of digital texts sparked resistance, at times, to the very concepts and ideas she wanted her students to learn about and discuss. Her students seemed to perceive many of the digital texts, as with the What Would You Do? clip, as framed to

173

suggest racism where there possibly was no racism. Subsequently, Erin hesitated to use them.

Reid—Increasing the Use of Digital Texts

When discussing the role of digital texts, Reid suggested several ways they were important in his course. At times he seemed to use them, as he shared, “So we can start as a ‘we.’” As with both Jamie and Erin, digital texts also seemed to provide Reid and his students with the ability to have a common experience and the ability to refer back to a compelling shared digital text as students developed new racial-literacy skills. Similar to

Jamie, Reid expressed that his students tended to love digital texts. He shared:

The lessons that kids loved the best had some kind of video, some kind of group work, and some kind of me leading them in a conversation that’s more directed.

An example of this is a session on a new topic that Reid added to the curriculum during the second quarter. He then revised this session to extend across 3 days during the third and fourth quarters of the school year. Following are some of the artifacts and discussion of Reid’s work.

Digital texts seemed integral to this new 3-day session on Race and Biology to help students explore the following research question: How come we look so different and yet our genetic codes are almost virtually the same? Reid shared that this question grew out of a discussion during a previous session where students began to explore what race is. Reid explained that the first time he taught this session, students watched a single

3-minute video on which the students took notes. He shared, “Then we moved on.” The second time he taught this, the work began with a survey that asked students to respond

174

to what he described as open-ended questions such as: How many races are there? Are there differences in sports abilities? He then facilitated a whole group conversation. To launch this discussion, Reid projected the images in Figures 9 and 10 on the Smartboard.

Figure 9. NBA distribution chart

Figure 10. SAT math scores

Reid explained that his goal was to bring several misconceptions front and center that students shared in their surveys or that he thought they might have come to believe as a result of societal messages.

Then students all watched a 6-minute video published by California News Reel:

Race: The Power of an Illusion. Reid recalled explaining to students that it would be really hard, “like high school-level biology,” and they would work together to understand

175

it. The video ended with a discussion on genetic concordance. Reid shared that he had worked hard to come up with an analogy to help students begin to understand complex ideas about race and genetics—specifically why people look differently if genetically they are virtually the same. He used the image in Figure 11 to create his analogy.

Figure 11. The genetic history of our racial differences

In a follow-up interview, I asked Reid to explain this artifact.

So I put up a picture of a green Honda civic and a red Honda civic. I said in Connecticut no matter what color car you have, your insurance is the same. But if you move from Connecticut to New York, people who have red cars pay higher insurance premiums in New York. So if you moved your car from Connecticut to New York, would it make sense to change the color of the car? The students answered yes. Then I asked, would the car be substantially different once you’ve changed the color? The kids said no. So I told them what we have here is a great example of what genetic history looks like. The vast majority of our genes, the engine, all of this stuff happened in Africa over a 100,000-year period and the bulk of who we are got made. And as we moved we needed different paint jobs for different environments. And those paint jobs helped us to fit better in wherever we were. But ultimately, when you come down to it, the engines are virtually the same. But in our society, we’ve created all sorts of rules based on the paint job.

Reid shared that he circled back to this “green car/red car” analogy over the next 2 days of this session, using it as an anchor to support students’ understanding as they continued to work with additional digital texts.

176

During the second and third day of this work, Reid provided students with options for continuing this inquiry, noted in Figure 12.

Figure 12. Exploration Work!

Reid provided students access to several digital text-sets grouped by topics related to race and genetics. For example, some students investigated the history of race as a concept in America. Others looked at skin color and the ways this can be dramatically different within families. Others still, Reid shared, although not listed in Figure 12, examined sports and bone density in connection with race. Students worked in small groups using chromebooks where they could access these digital text-sets. Reid shared that there were about five texts in each set that included articles, audio interviews, and videos.

On the third day of this session on race and biology, Reid invited students to report out about the most interesting thing they had discovered. Then, he engaged his students in a conversation that seemed to be about what they could do with this information outside of this course.

177

First, we about talked what are some of the things you can avoid. Like going up to a kid who is Black and asking them if they’re good at basketball. Making assumptions about people regarding the kinds of music they listen to. And then I asked them, how might you intercede if you saw these kinds of behaviors happening?

Here, Reid turned the attention of the class to ways they could take action based on what they were learning.

Reflections on the Usefulness of Digital Texts

As Erin, Jamie, and Reid looked back at the teaching they had each done across the year, they evaluated the role of digital texts and their usefulness when teaching about race and racism. They each provided several reasons for the use of digital texts in their courses. These reasons included opportunitities for students to learn new and complex concepts, to expose blindspots, and to invite students to take a glimpse into the stories of others different from themselves.

Jamie, in particular, expressed the importance of digital texts as a way of exposing students’ blindspots. Moreover, her experiences teaching with digital texts demonstrated the ways students sometimes resisted such exposure. For Erin, the importance of using digital texts lessened as she continued to teach her course. Similar to

Jamie, Erin also experienced resistance from students. Unlike Jamie, however, Erin significantly reduced the number of digital texts used in her teaching. By contrast, digital texts were bedrocks in Reid’s course. He felt that when his students had access to compelling digital texts, they could grasp complex ideas. Unlike Jamie and Erin, Reid reported that he used multiple digital texts in almost every session. His use of digital texts included surveys, video clips, articles, charts, and other visuals. It seemed that for Reid,

178

teaching without the use of digital texts would have dramatically changed what he believed his students were able to accomplish in his course.

Erin, Jamie, and Reid experienced both success and failure with digital texts in their courses, but overall, their reflections indicated to me that digital texts do have value in the racial-justice curriculum. However, a thorough consideration of type and amount, the age range of students, and the personalities of students can be the key to their success when teaching about race. A further indication of the importance of digital texts in this work is that all of the teachers reported they continued to update their digital text reference list that was created during the development of the curriculum for the courses.

In this way, the teachers would have access to each other’s ideas about the digital texts they continued to research and use. Erin described this resource as “their backpack” where they could always “reach in” and look for what was needed.

In the following section, I discuss my findings on the facilitation methods of each of the teachers.

Facilitation Methods for Teaching About Race

As Erin, Jamie, and Reid reflected on their experiences teaching their courses, I noted distinct facilitation methods they each used to plan for and deliver instruction for their courses. For Jamie and Reid, digital texts were a prominent feature in their facilitation of instruction to varying degrees. For Erin, however, central to her facilitation methods was teambuilding and kinestheic activities.

179

Jamie—Guiding Students During Discussions

I observed the data for ways Jamie approached facilitating instruction and conversations in her course. When facilitating challenging conversations about race, I noted in Figure 13 a set of nonlinear and interconnected approaches. I discuss these approaches along with my observations below.

Figure 13. Jamie: Facilitating conversations about race

Digital texts. Jamie expressed that digital texts were powerful ways to bring her students together in discussion about racism in their lives. They seemed to be effective when used to unpack events of which her students were both aware and unaware. Digital texts, along with discussion, seemed to be the heart of Jamie’s course as the teachers originally planned when they developed the curriculum. Jamie’s students seemed to be engaged and empowered by digital texts and many researched new ones independently, beyond the classroom, to share with peers and contribute to the curriculum. When her sixth graders engaged a digital text, it was typically a whole class experience.

180

Space to speak. Jamie provided space for students to have their say, even when their speech was, at times, problematic. It was important to Jamie that her students felt safe enough to share their opinions, even if they were egregious to her. Regarding the discussion around the Starbucks event, she recalled:

Inside I was cringing while she was talking and thinking how am I going to respond to this? I had to breathe and allow this to unfold. My fear in the moment was jumping in and then squashing the discussion, which would then serve no one justice.

Jamie’s reflection brings to light how tricky it can be for educators to navigate challenging conversations involving race—determining in the moment when to allow a discussion to continue and when to interrupt. When asked how she knew to proceed in this way, Jamie described it as a “gut feeling” that came from knowing her students and their intent. She described the student who was defending the Starbucks barista as follows: “She took a risk, a big risk, and she needs to learn. I could not allow myself or anyone else to pile on her.”

Ask questions. As Jamie facilitated challenging discussions in her classroom, I noted the frequency with which she asked questions to gain clarity herself and help her students clarify their positions. These questions included asking, Who are the “they”? and Where did you get ideas about this from? By asking questions, Jamie was able to sustain the conversation rather than “squash” it in a manner that supported students’ growth. She challenged her students’ ideas with questions that pushed them to recognize flaws, rather than making declarative statements that could be perceived as authoritative and judgmental by her students.

181

Draw upon racial-literacy skills. Another approach Jamie used in her teaching was to return to previous sessions from the racial-justice curriculum and call on the strategies that the students had in their toolboxes. For example, by asking students to recall the session on labels, she was able to help the class consider whether their ideas were influenced by a stereotype and to apply their learning to the specific lesson and discussion at hand.

Provide counternarratives. Jamie made strategic choices in her course to provide her students with counternarratives that exposed blindspots and disrupted normative thinking. For example, her decision to play the audio of the 911 call made by the Starbucks barista provided a counternarrative for students who were sharing erroneous facts about this event. Listening to this text, students could reflect on the actual words and actions of the barista. This helped other students in the class to consider this event from a perspective different from what one of their peers was offering about the

Black men, in particular. During this discussion, as well as others I observed in the data,

Jamie framed her responses to open up spaces for students to consider different perspectives. She used phrases such as “Is it possible…” and “What if we considered…” to encourage students to think about what might be missing from their interpretations of events and issues and to seek out the voices of many.

Encourage discourse. There were numerous times, according to Jamie, that she could have had one-on-one conversations with students who shared a troublesome position about race. Jamie instead routinely opened the floor for other students to respond. During this process, Jamie reported being adamant that her students speak to one another without being aggressive or antagonizing. She explained that she had set the

182

tone for respectful, safe discussions from Day 1 when she and her students co-constructed a class contract and added, “No one is going to learn by being humiliated.”

Follow-up. An important part of this teaching for Jamie was following up personally with her students. She had this to say about her student who spoke out against the men in the Starbucks event: “I had to make sure that she would be leaving the classroom feeling safe and not like she had done something wrong.” Realizing the risk involved in expressing ideas in a class on race and racism, Jamie shared that her goal was not to shield her students from discomfort, but to ensure that they were not emotionally harmed by an experience.

Erin—Incorporating Teambuilding

In response to the resistance Erin experienced from her eighth grade students, she focused extensively on facilitation methods in her course that might, as she had previously expressed, “open the door” to difficult ideas about race and racism. Her methods were anchored by a kinesthetic component that often occurred prior to, during, and even after discussions about race and racism. I noted the following approaches in

Figure 14 that Erin seemed to employ in her teaching.

Figure 14. Erin: Facilitating conversations about race

183

Teambuilding. Upon entering the class, Erin began to involve her students in teambuilding or community-building activities. She would often challenge students to work collaboratively and change the physical space in a way that involved students using math and logic.

I might say, for example, we’ll need four seating groups that make it possible for students in each group to see one another as well as the Smartboard and we’ll also need space in the room to all stand in a circle. Discuss your ideas and make a plan for how we can do this.

Or students might be asked to work with their peers to build a lego tower at their table group to a specific height and width using only certain types or colors of blocks. Erin explained, “I found that they needed to do something that wasn’t always content-related before we started.” Even though we had originally developed the curriculum so that students would begin each session by reflecting in their notebooks, Erin found that it was not effective for her students to come to the class and start thinking about a heavy, emotional topic. This kinesthic, community-building piece seemed to help the students, as Erin shared, “reset their brains, body, and the environment.”

Digital texts. As discussed in Chapter V, Erin reported a decrease in the use of digital texts as she continued to teach across the school year. However, when she used them, she found that her students were more responsive to those that were more scholarly. They did not respond positively to videos in particular that felt gimmicky. For example, she shared that her students responded more favorably to a TED talk on colorblindness by Melody Hobson than to the MTV Decoded video on colorblindness by

Franchesca Ramsey. I continued to ask Erin more about her perspective about the importance of digital texts in a racial-justice curriculum in the following exchange:

184

Sonja: It’s interesting because I was thinking that the digital texts provided a little bit of a buffer for us. Here’s Franchesca Ramsey or here’s Peggy McIntosh or here’s whoever saying this and now let’s talk about. As opposed to me always being the person to say it. And I wonder if that’s influenced by my identity, as a Black woman, because the digital texts had different types of people, not just people of color saying it, particularly with this audience. Erin: And that’s why I found it was important for me to say a lot of it. Because as a White woman, I wanted them to hear me say certain things. Especially when we talked about privilege. Especially when we talked about things like that. I wanted to be the one to say it sometimes.

Thinking back on my findings about digital texts, I noted that one way in which I had thought about their usefulness was how they supported students in courses on racial justice. Here, however, Erin and I thought how digital texts support the teachers in their instruction about racial justice. For me, digital texts served as a refuge, at times, from always having to point to examples of racism. In more than one way, digital texts for Erin could be a hindrance rather than a help, such as when they silenced what she perceived as her power and influence as a White woman giving voice to racism to her White students.

Nonverbal responses. Erin reflected on using the guiding questions from the curriculum. However, rather than always encouraging a verbal discussion, she might invite students to respond in a nonverbal, kinesthetic way. For example, students might have a pile of blocks in which to build a tower. Erin would ask a question and then say,

“If you disagree, use a blue block.” Some students in the group would place a block without needing to discuss why, while others might not. Or, after asking a question, Erin might invite students to use the thumbs-up/down signal. For example, Erin paused the beginning of a Google Pixel 2 commercial on The Fletcher Street Crew, which shows several African American men and their urban Philadelphia neighborhood. She asked students, “How many of you would feel safe walking through this neighborhood?” and to

185

give a thumbs up if they would feel safe, a thumbs down if they would feel unsafe, or their thumb to the side if they were not sure. In this way, Erin found that to assuage the resistance of her students and increase participation, nonverbal communication was important. Further, this provided everybody with a chance to participate, rather than just one or two voices that could dominate a conversation. Students could look across the classroom at each other’s structures and note the color-coding or notice the thumb placements of their peers to glean a visual understanding, albeit limited, of each other’s feeling and beliefs in response to the questions Erin posed.

Peer-to-peer talk. Erin shared that her students were more willing to talk to each other rather than in a large group during discussions she led. In Chapter V, I discussed how, at times, a focus on veering content seemed to overshadow the essential goal of students having critical conversations about race. Therefore, Erin began to provide more opportunities for students to talk to each other during instruction. An example she shared was using concentric circles that, again, added a kinesthetic piece to the course, getting students up and moving, while they discussed challenging topics. She also encouraged students to use “oops” and “ouch” in their conversations to signal to peers if they have been hurt (“ouch”) or to acknowledge this slight (“oops”).

Reid—Researching and Investigating

As with Erin and Jamie, I looked across the data to examine the facilitation methods Reid seemed to employ in his course with seventh grade students. I created the image in Figure 15 to capture my findings.

186

Figure 15. Reid: Facilitating conversations about race

Overarching research question. Reid seemed to preface the work in his course with an overarching research question that emerged from the curiosity of his students.

After his students expressed questions, such as how can people look different and yet have the same biology, Reid took these questions and thought about ways his students could investigate them.

Inquiry-based approach. Reid described what his students learned about race and biology the first time he taught this as “pretty shallow” and shared that “The kids didn’t fully understand the ideas and they didn’t feel invested necessary in exploring it further.” He began teaching in ways that encouraged an inquiry-based approach to topics around race. As a result, students had choice in the investigations they wanted to continue to pursue that were related to the overarching research question.

Digital text and digital text-sets. To support their investigations, Reid increased the number of digital texts in the curriculum. Similar to Jamie, he used digital texts to provide a shared experience. However, he also created digital text-sets for students to access. He explained:

187

The digital texts offered depth and complexity. The students enjoyed it more and got more out of it and had more to say about it than if I had simply defined what race is and how our genes work in just one lesson.

For example, during a later discussion about a racist tweet by comedian/actress Roseanne

Barr, Reid shared that a student referred back to their previous discussions on ways they might intercede in issues related to race and biology. He stated that his student exclaimed,

“This goes back to our desire to see ourselves as completely different species!”

Collaborative investigations. Students often worked collaboratively in groups during Reid’s course. This made it possible for students to have choice, to explore different ideas, and to have the support of a few peers as they grappled with complex ideas together.

Allyship and activism. Reid encouraged students to share what they had learned as a result of their exploration. Also, he routinely posed questions that would invite students to think about how this learning could inform the ways they might act in the future. Reid shared that his students did not always have answers to these kinds of questions, but he believed they seemed to give them pause and fruit for thought.

Reflections on Facilitation Methods for Teaching About Race

The data revealed that each of the teachers utilized distinct and varied methods to support their students’ understanding of, and receptiveness to, the content of their courses. There were specific, and perhaps, developmental differences between each grade level in the ways students responded to instruction. Each teacher expressed acts of resistance by their students in their courses throughout the year. However, the level of

188

resistance and, as Erin described, “bravado” of students was most apparent at the eighth grade level. The data showed the facilitation methods each of the teachers used were developed to help their students understand complex ideas around race as well as to mitigate their resistance.

For Erin, she reported that she faced resistance from her eighth grade students daily. She stated, “They don’t want to own this,” to explain why she thought students resisted ideas brought forth in the course. She believed the source of the resistance was her White students’ refusal to see themselves as possibly exhibiting behaviors that could be defined as racist. Instead, involving students in teambuilding activities and being more selective about the use of digital texts helped Erin to engage her students in learning about race and racism.

Jamie seemed to mitigate the resistance of her students by helping them to pay close attention to the details of what they were learning about. She found that some of her sixth grade students made negative assumptions about groups of people, she believed, as a result of societal messages they had come to believe as truth. To disrupt this process of assumption making, Jamie used a variety of approaches in her instruction, including providing counternarratives in her course. She also engaged her students in a process of deconstructing their assumptions by challenging them to think about where they originated and to apply their racial-literacy skills as they analyzed ideas.

Similar to Erin, Reid explained that his students enjoyed the parts of the course that they “felt the least threatened by.” However, he reported that an inquiry-based

189

approach to instruction that involved providing students with access to a variety of digital texts and choice among them was the best method to engage his seventh graders in work around race and racism.

In the following section, I continue to discuss my findings around what each teacher learned as a result of teaching his or her courses. Specifically, I share the questions they believe educators should consider when taking up this work.

Questioning Ourselves When Teaching About Race and Racism

As we each looked back on our teaching experiences, I noted more issues we grappled with, including our ideas about Who can teach racial-justice curriculum? and

How do you know if you’re ready to teach about race? These discussions led to findings around the kinds of questions each teacher reflected on during the process of developing and teaching the racial-justice curriculum.

As with any curriculum, educators continually ask themselves numerous questions before and as they teach. However, each teacher wrestled with unique kinds of questions. I made note of three essential questions that emerged as Erin, Jamie, Reid, and

I each reflected on our teaching. Further, we considered the ways the questions we each reflected on could be beneficial for all educators to ask themselves when embarking on a journey to teach about race and racism. These questions might help educators gauge their willingness and readiness to take up racial-justice work, particularly with predominantly

White students. Table 6 demonstrates the three questions each teacher shared.

190

Table 6

Questions for Educators to Consider When Teaching About Race and Racism

Erin How does race play a role How has your own racial How do we talk about race in a or a factor in different identity helped to inform the way that is honest, meaningful, aspects of your life? person you are? and safe?

Jamie Am I a racist? Are you ready for this? Are we prepared to not know whether this work is making a difference?

Reid How do I respect different What are the goals in terms How do we discuss racial justice audiences in the same of what students are able to in a way that is surprising and classroom? do coming out of the complicated, and doesn’t classroom, as opposed to just reinforce old culture wars or what they would know problems? content-wise?

Sonja Am I prepared to Am I prepared to be Do we have the emotional acknowledge my exposed? energy to engage this work? limitations?

Individual as well as focus group interviews provided dimension and meaning for these questions, as well as the ways teachers’ questions overlapped, diverged, or represented conflicting ideas between us around teaching about race and racism.

Both Erin and Jamie raised questions that demonstrated the importance of teachers reflecting on their own identities. They raised the questions, respectively, Am I a racist? and How has your own racial identity helped to inform the person you are?

Jamie felt it was important to consider Am I a racist? before considering teaching about racial justice.

You have to answer this for yourself. Interograte who you are, what your beliefs are and interrogate yourself. Find the blindspots, answer honestly, and work on yourself.

Therefore, it seemed that for Jamie, taking up this work begins by thinking pointedly at the ways in which we all have biases. Further, when Jamie boldly stated that educators

191

should ask themselves Am I a racist? she seemed to be challenging educators to consider what it means to be a racist, beyond egregious acts of hate, and to face the facts of what it means for all of us to live in a society where racism thrives. She seemed to be challenging educators to see that no one is immune from the effects of this and that they must be willing to confront their own biases. Then, Jamie suggested that educators work on themselves to acknowledge and address these biases before teaching about race and racism.

Erin also discussed the importance of educators being self-reflective and examining their own race and how that has played out in their own lives when she raised the question How has your own racial identity helped to inform the person you are?

However, she saw this process as one that both educators and students could explore together.

When I think about the way that I approached the curriculum development and implementation, I think the questions are the same for me and for the students. I think the journey as an educator is just as important as the journey as a student. So it’s almost as though you have to answer those questions and you have to engage in the curriculum in order to effectively implement it. You can’t just go through the motions, so to speak. And it’s only through doing that work, I think, that you see what the students need.

For Erin, teaching about racial justice is not something teachers can do at arm’s-length.

They, too, must engage alongside their students in a process of self-discovery. Erin also spotlighted the importance of current events as part of a racial-justice curriculum that helps both educators and students explore together the answers to the questions: How does race play a role or how is race a factor in different aspects of your life? How has your own racial identity helped to inform the person you are? How do we talk about race in a way that is honest, meaningful, and safe?

192

And I really also think that examining current events is so important because that’s both teacher and students processing things together. At the same time. And then the students observe how you as a teacher are processing those things and answering all of those questions. How does race play a factor here? How can we talk about this in a way that’s open-minded and honest and safe?

Although Erin expressed that her students often struggled to name racism as a cause in some of the current events issues she attempted to discuss with them, she continued to bring these issues to their attention throughout the course. An example of a current event topic that Erin explored with her students was that of Colin Kaepernick and the other NFL players, both Black and White, who took a knee during the playing of the

National Anthem before the games. She shared her reflections on this in her teacher journal and recalled discussing this with the teachers during a check-in meeting about the course. All teachers named this as a hot-button topic that they addressed with their students in their course. Erin shared, “It was important to talk about it. They’d all heard of it, but many students didn’t know why the players were taking a knee, what this was all about.” Part of talking about race in honest, meaningful, and safe ways, according to

Erin, included providing space in a racial-justice curriculum for teachers and students together to examine issues happening in the world that relate to race and racism.

One question Reid reported reflecting on repeatedly was as follows: How do I respect different audiences in the same classroom? This was a particular concern for

Reid as he considered both, as he described, “dominant” and “subordinate” groups in the same classroom.

I think that’s one of the biggest challenges of a curriculum. Especially in a curriculum in a school in the specific context that is in this district, is how do we recognize that there are obviously dominant or majority groups in the classroom. And there are subordinate groups in the classroom. How do you ask questions and have discussions that are respectful of both those audiences?

193

One way Reid thought about navigating this challenge and mitigating the risk of insensitivity toward both groups was by relinquishing some of the control over the curriculum: “I think kids need to feel that they have more power over what happens in this course.” As he revised and developed the curriculum during his teaching, Reid explained that he continually looked for spaces where his students could influence the curriculum.

A racial-justice curriculum that works best is one that has questions at the center of it. Where there are low academic expectations for students, less coverage of materials, and instead a focus on bridging questions that allow students to avoid race discussions at the start until they get to know and trust one another.

Even within a course developed for students to explore a racial-justice curriculum,

Reid had learned that it was important for students not to engage in conversations about race if they were not ready. To me, Reid seemed to be expressing the need for a “meet them where they are approach” when teaching students about race and racism. In my researcher journal, I wrote a memo that expressed my concerns about this, particularly the danger of how some White teachers might interpret this philosophy.

I guess I just worry that this can potentially let kids off the hook and halt the progress of this work. And ultimately that the cost of moving forward only when our White students are ready, denies the humanity of others.

I wondered if this approach was truly best for students. My concerns were that it could potentially result in students opting out of challenging conversations, rather than teachers helping students to develop the skills that enable them to lean into uncomfortable discussions about race.

Also important to Reid was thinking about the outcome the teachers envisioned for students as they developed the curriculum and whether it could be achieved in this

194

particular context where there are few students of color. Reid expressed concerns about this:

The curriculum for the course gives them a chance to learn racial-literacy skills for sure. I’m just concerned about when and where they get to practice this.

One of Reid’s questions included thinking about what students might be able to do coming out of the classroom, as opposed to just what they would know content-wise.

Erin, Jamie, and I thought about Reid’s concern during a focus group discussion and reflected on the ways in which this was complicated:

Erin: Remember how we kept talking about how do we evaluate this work. Even after teaching this course four times across the year, I’m not sure there are any clear answers. I just wanted to accomplish having open, honest conversations safely and for students to do so willing. Jamie: There’s no fixed measurement for this work. But if students had some epiphanies, made some discoveries— Sonja: Then it’s a win! But hopefully, also, they have some language under their belts. To help them analyze and discuss issues about race. Erin: They can practice this if they choose to. Among themselves. When their peers say stuff in the hallways and in the cafeteria. If they do that, then yes, it’s a win.

In an environment that is predominantly homogeneous in terms of students and teachers,

Reid was concerned about whether the racial-justice curriculum included opportunities for students to apply the content and practice both having challenging conversations about race and demonstrating allyship. Despite the limitations on demographics in the school district, Erin, Jamie, and I recalled having this concern in our minds when we developed the racial-justice projects (RJP) students would engage in toward the end of the course. We had envisioned the RJP as an opportunity for students to synthesize and apply what they had learned so far as they worked collaboratively on a research project.

For example, sixth graders worked in groups to explore representations of race in

195

literature and media. Seventh grade students would examine the issue of environmental racism by exploring topics such as Hurricane Katrina, the Flint, Michigan water crisis, and the South Dakota pipeline conflict. The eighth grade would examine government, law, and policies that spotlight issues of race such as immigration, racial profiling, police brutality, and the removal of Confederate monuments.

The development of the RJP in the curriculum was also influenced by our beliefs about the role of current events. As we developed the curriculum, Erin, Jamie, and I felt strongly that opening up the curriculum to an exploration of current events would disrupts traditional power dynamics in teaching by making it possible for both students and teachers to process and practice the skill of recognizing the role of race in their lives together. In this way, they could address the concern Reid raised by students practicing their discourse skills around race-based topics. Yet, Reid’s point about homogenity in schools was not lost. I noted the ways that White students having few interactions with students or teachers of color place limitations on the curriculum and teaching for racial justice.

A major point of contention among Reid, Erin, and me occurred during a discussion of one of Reid’s essential questions, How do we discuss racial justice in a way that is surprising and complicated, and doesn’t reinforce old culture wars or problems?

When asked to say more about this, Reid stated:

I think it’s important to think about how do we facilitate these kinds of conversations without reinforcing old culture wars. How do we do this so that you have kids in the classroom whose parents may be fundamentally opposed to the idea of the course, but who are excited by what their children are learning? So that’s a big question for me. How do you teach a class without it being a political class or a politicized class in just its existence. I think that is personally interesting to me.

196

Reid’s notion of teaching about race and that not being a political endeavor was one that

Erin challenged:

Erin: I feel like being political is exactly the point of having this class. This is political in the sense that we are condemning racism. Naming that it’s wrong and helping students see it around them. We’ve picked a side. Sonja: Ultimately, I’m asking students to reexamine every aspect of their lives and the world around them. I don’t see how we can possibly be neutral when it comes to racism and the policies that uphold it and teach a course about racial-justice.

Reid’s perspective was surprising to me and to Erin. This approach, teaching about race and racism without bringing up “old tribal wars,” seemed to Erin and me like skirting around certain issues in an attempt to avoid the potential discomfort of some students and their families. Erin and I challenged this question, as we expressed our belief that such an approach feeds into the silencing of discussions about race, potentially adding to a cycle of avoidance in our school district. Further, we felt such silencing is not neutral; it too is political. For Erin and me, this curriculum and course were ways to identify and interrupt such attempts.

In fact, one of my essential questions was in direct contrast with Reid’s. Rather than thinking about ways to avoid being political in our teaching, I reflected on the importance of educators considering whether they were ready to be exposed. During a focus discussion, I shared:

I don’t think teachers can go into this and not reveal their biases and blindspots and that of their students and of this country. Our job isn’t to rescue students every time they feel uncomfortable. We have to help them get comfortable with being uncomfortable. If not, we end up trying to be neutral which just means centering the feelings of White people in this work at the expense of people of color.

197

By this, I was thinking about the dangers of discussions about race and racism in predominantly White spaces that privilege Whiteness and silence the experiences of people of color. Talking about racism is inherently uncomfortably. I was concerned about the ways this can become an excuse to not fully engage in this work, particularly in our school district, which I believed only serves to reinforce racism.

In addition to considering being exposed, another of my questions focused on the emotions of teachers. My question on teachers’ preparedness to put forth the emotional energy that is required when taking up this work is one that I have thought a great deal about and discussed with my colleagues. From disrupting silences, navigating racist comments, and mitigating resistance, I discussed the toll that I believe teachers pay when teaching about race and racism. Both Erin and Jamie expressed shouldering the stress of doing this work well. Jamie remarked, “I felt pressure to get it right. But later in the year

I found happiness in the small victories.” Self-imposed pressure was a feeling that Erin also discussed: “The burden lightened as the year evolved. I became more forgiving [of myself], more flexible, less controlling.” Erin and Jamie described an internal toll that felt heavy at the start of the course, during its first quarter, but then lessened each quarter that followed. But for me, the internal toll was about more than just teaching the course well.

As an African American teacher who had endured microaggressions in this school district for almost two decades, teaching this course was tremendous emotional labor. I discussed this during a group discussion:

I have to decide between confronting racist ideas that come up during the course either in the materials or in discussions with students, or to let something slide. It’s a risk especially for me as a Black woman to speak up. It doesn’t always go well. I remember once being called into [the principal’s] office during my first

198

year here, because a kid went home and complained to his parents that I was doing too much :Black stuff.” I always have to weigh my words.

The internal struggle about what to call attention to during the course and what to let go, I felt, was exhausting. Therefore, teaching about race and racism in a predominantly White school district, for me, required additional emotional labor that all teachers—but particularly teachers of color—should consider when taking up this work.

Reflections on Questioning Ourselves When Teaching About Race and Racism

The teachers’ questions revealed each of their insights about what educators might consider when planning to teach about racial justice. This included self-reflective work as well as the notion that this kind of teaching is best when educators are not engaging in it alone.

An initial review of the kinds of questions each teacher believed were essential to consider, shown in Table 6, revealed two important points. One is that educators must be willing to work on themselves. Since schools traditionally have been silent around issues of race, it is not uncommon for teachers, particularly White educators, to have gone through much of their lives without studying or talking about race and racism. Therefore,

Erin, Jamie, and I seemed to ask questions that pushed educators to consider, confront, and interrogate their knowledge and experiences with race. Also revealed was what seemed to me a teaching stance that educators work collaboratively when teaching for racial justice in their schools. Without prompting, each of the teachers posed questions using the pronoun “I” to suggest what they believed teachers should consider individually. However, the teachers each included a “we” question. I noted a pattern of including questions from the standpoint of “we,” which indicated the teachers’ thinking

199

about the importance of educators engaging this work with colleagues rather than in isolation.

In myriad and complex ways, the teachers demonstrated that teaching about racial justice is a special kind of curriculum and a special kind of teaching. Prior to actually teaching the course, Erin shared her belief that creating a binder containing the lessons developed, it seemed, was enough of a pathway for other teachers to engage in the work of teaching a racial-justice curriculum to students. But upon deeper examination of each of the teachers’ reflections about their experiences, they also seemed to learn that there is, in fact—contrary to what Erin initially seemed to believe—no binder or script that could help them respond to all of the situations that arose, or all of the types of issues raised by students, or all of the obstacles that the teachers faced.

I conclude this chapter by sharing new insights into what the racial-justice curriculum consists of and how this continued to emerge and expand across this study.

What Does a Racial-Justice Curriculum Entail?

In looking across the data to examine what had been learned from teaching their courses, I was able to consider how each of the teachers’ experiences contributed to further understandings of what a racial-justice curriculum entails. In previous chapters, I attempted to bring clarity around this. Here, I discuss additional insights that I hope contribute to this understanding. These include understandings about materials such as digital texts, the facilitation methods that help teach about race, and the essential questions educators might consider when taking on this work.

200

In addition to the ideas discussed previously, it seems a racial-justice curriculum attempts to expose students’ blindspots by inviting students to take part in the experiences and stories of others who are different from themselves. Digital texts are one way this can be achieved. However, based on the teachers’ experiences, it is important to present these digital texts as “a” truth rather than “the” truth. The more stories collected and shared in a racial-justice curriculum, the more perspectives students are able to learn from while also learning to examine complex issues from multiple angles.

Also, a racial-justice curriculum is one that, along with its facilitator, guides students through an iterative process of raising, repeating, reframing, and challenging questions. The data revealed that it is this process that moved the needle toward students learning about race and racism with greater specificity. Moreover, a racial-justice curriculum also deeply considers the developmental and specific needs of students at each grade level. This includes the need for students to engage in experiences that are fun and not always race-based while in their racial-justice courses.

Additionally, a racial-justice curriculum is best developed and taught when teachers reflect on essential questions. These kinds of questions can spotlight areas of congruence and sites of contention among educators who take up this work. It is an important part of the process for educators to both affirm and challenge each other’s thinking. These questions call attention to the biases we all hold—intentional or unintentional. By taking an introspective look at themselves and examining their own lives, educators can gain insights into the types of materials and methods their students may benefit from, as well as the kinds of obstacles and resistance they will need to mitigate.

201

Reflections on Teaching a Racial-Justice Curriculum

There were several key findings around what the teachers reported they learned about teaching their racial-justice courses. Essentially, each of the teachers learned that it was important to keep the knowledge, experiences, and developmental levels of students central to the decision making that occured when teaching these courses. While it was important for the teachers to have preliminary ideas about how the curriculum and courses could go, they discovered it was most important to remain flexible and allow for student involvement and multiple revisions to teaching methods based on their students’ responses to the curriculum.

The usefulness of digital texts emerged as an important takeaway. When developing the courses, the teachers had planned for digital texts to be the heart of the curriculum. They reported feeling anxious and concerned about having enough material for their 80-minute classes, and they believed digital texts would help them address the goals of their courses. Therefore, they spent a great deal of time researching, thinking about, and discussing these texts. The teachers maintained and updated a digital resources list across their year of teaching in order to continue making recommendations for digital texts. Because digital texts seemed so essential to curriculum, I wanted to look across the data to determine their usefulness in these courses. In doing so, I made several discoveries.

I noticed that digital texts were important when teaching about race and racism, but to varying degrees. In fact, they at times had an adverse effect with some students.

Also, digital texts alone where not always powerful enough to interrupt stereotypes that some students had come to believe. They were also not always successul in convincing

202

other students of various shapes and forms of racism in the world around them. What teachers seemed to learn was that, at times, they lost focus on the soul of the curriculum, which was the conversations they had envisioned facilitating with students. The data demonstrated the ways all of the teachers continually discovered the importance of keeping discussions at the core of racial-justice work as they taught their classes.

Also, in examining the data, I discovered that each teacher used different facilitation methods as they taught their courses. These methods were, at times, in response to student resistance. For example, Jamie seemed to employ a specific protocol for discussions in her course. Erin discovered that using more teambuilding and kinesthic methods were key in her work of facilitating conversations and that digital texts were not as instrumental as she thought they would be. Reid found that using an inquiry-based approach to facilitate discussions was more effective, often resulting in an increase in the number of digital texts his students accessed in the course.

Further, as a result of examining the data for what the teachers seemed to have learned, I observed that their insights addressed a salient, overaching question: What really matters in developing a racial-justice curriculum and teaching students about race and racism? Although the data revealed no easy or singular answer to this question, the teachers’ reflections demonstrated what they believed was most beneficial for educators to consider if they want to take up this work to consider. These considerations, they believed, can bring educators closer to answering this overarching question. They include a process of self-examination as well as identifying colleagues with whom to work collaboratively. The teachers reflected on the essentiality of having allies in this work

203

who help shoulder the emotional labor and complexities that come from teaching about race and racism.

In the following chapter, I provide implications for the field of educational research based on this study. I discuss the breakthroughs and boundaries of teaching a racial-justice curriculum with predominantly White students. Specifically, I discuss the ways this study contributes to the existing research and provides significant insights into teaching about race and racism in K-12 schools.

204

Chapter VII

IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

PRACTICE, POLICY, AND RESEARCH

This study, informed by both the research on critical literacy and teaching about race in K-12 schools, explored the experiences and perspectives of teachers who developed and taught a racial-justice curriculum in their predominantly White school district. The outcomes of this research provides several insights for K-12 educators on teaching about race and racism, particularly in White, affluent, liberal contexts such as the setting for this study. In this chapter, I make implications based on the findings of this research and share my conclusions. However, I also aim to sustain a critical conversation by discussing both considerations for practice, policy, and research based on what I have learned and by exploring some dilemmas and complexities around teaching about race and racism.

Despite Gee’s (2001) notion that schools will not be able to make substantial reforms toward equity unless the larger society changes, this dissertation demonstrates my investment in what some might perceive as an imagined ideal. This ideal stems from

Freire’s (1987, 2000) beliefs about education, which includes teaching that transcends traditional classroom boundaries and creates more transformative spaces. As such, this dissertation has also been about my journey as a researcher, complicated by various roles:

205

a teacher within this research site, a participant in the study, a colleague of the teachers in this study. In this chapter, I grapple with the possibilities of teaching about race and racism with White students that can be gleaned from this study—its boundaries, breakthroughs, and the questions that linger.

In the following sections, I provide a brief summary of the findings chapters.

Then, I return to the research questions and use my analysis to discuss implications and considerations for teachers, teacher education, policy, and research. After suggesting possible implications based on the findings, I offer a critique of this study and turn my attention to creating a dialogue about issues and complexities that came to light during this research. Finally, I end by offering a metaphor to situate the role of the teachers, like those of this study, who worked to bring attention to silences about race in curriculum, and I reflect on how this study has challenged my ideas and beliefs.

Reflections on the Study

Throughout this study, I sought to examine what the teachers learned as a result of developing and teaching racial-justice curriculum. I conducted six individual interviews and two focus group interviews to explore their reflections. This data revealed the sociocultural backgrounds of each of the teachers of this study and what brought them to this work as well as both individual and collective perspectives of the teachers. Also, I examined the curriculum itself and related artifacts independently and alongside of the teachers in order to reflect on our decision-making processes, which included various rationales for revisions. Then, I explored what the teachers discovered as a result of teaching their courses. This included their initial and revised thinking about the materials

206

and methods used. Finally, I examined how this process of looking back to reflect on our work led to the continual refinining of ideas about what a racial-justice curriculum entails—even as we identified ways that our initial curriculum sometimes fell short of these newfound realizations.

My close relationships with the teachers of this study as well as the theoretical framework I utilized for this research brought clarity to experiences that were, at times, murky. In Chapter IV, I presented how we grappled with the ways that race mattered in our school district, despite its silencing, and the ways in which each of our unique backgrounds played a role in maintaining or interrupting the silence. This led to important findings about the influences that contribute to developing a consciousness about race, raising an awareness about the silencing of race in White-dominated spaces, and educators being willing to work toward disrupting such silences in their school district. Chapter V discussed the additional challenges that surfaced when we debated and wrestled with issues surrounding the initial racial-justice curriculum we had developed.

Key findings included noting major ways in which the curriculum was revised both during the teaching of the courses as well as in hindsight. As we reflected on our individual ideas about a revised scope and sequence of curricular topics, this led to important understandings such as the importance of fluidity and malleability in a racial- justice curriculum in order for the students and their questions about race and racism to remain central. Chapter VI focused on each of the teachers’ reflections about teaching their courses and our realizations that too much structure had the potential to stifle the kinds of discussions that were crucial to the success of the curriculum. The usefulness of digital texts was a surprising and important finding that brought to light the specific

207

developmental needs of each grade level, and I discovered key findings around the distinct facilitation methods each of the teachers utilized in the courses. Further, our discussions around teaching about race and racism shed light on the complexity of determining the essential questions that are beneficial for educators to consider, including their qualifications, willingness, and readiness to take up this work. Finally, additional understandings about essential components of the racial-justice curriculum included the role of non-race-based work to increase student engagement.

Return to Research Questions

The following overaching question framed this study: What can be learned from teachers who develop and teach racial-justice curriculum to help their predominantly

White, affluent middle-school students become more race-conscious? As a long-time employee in the school district of this research site, I wanted to address an issue that I had noticed about how the topic of race was avoided and silenced in the curriculum. This issue is also one that has been echoed in the research (Flynn, 2012; Haviland, 2008;

Lewis, 2001). To answer the framing question of this research, I address each of the three subquestions of this study.

As teachers reflect on and describe the process of developing and teaching racial- justice curriculum, what do they report they have learned?

By nature, teaching is rife with uncertainity as teachers encounter numerous issues and make myriad decisions each day. Critical teaching—which places students, their experiences, and input at the center while addressesing challenging topics—can raise even more ambiguity (Shor, 1992). This study demonstrated that each teacher’s

208

process of developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum included making countless decisions and their practice was filled with uncertainty. As the teachers reflected on their experiences, it appeared that what they learned with certainty was that the purpose of a racial-justice curriculum was as much to guide them as their students.

Orginally, the teachers thought the curriculum they developed would be a road map for teaching the course, but they learned that its purpose served more to push them toward the internal work needed to prepare for the journey on which they were embarking. Facilitating conversations about race effectively with students required each of the teachers to engage in an ongoing process of internal work. This work involved careful observations of the context where they teach, the content choices they made, and the monitoring of their own values, beliefs, and identities and how these influenced their practice. It included evaluating their beliefs and noting how they are intrinsically connected to oppressive systems and culture. For example, by the third quarter of teaching her course, Erin showed her eighth graders a clip of an urban neighborhood where three African American men in hoodies and jeans were on a desolate street. She asked her class to put their thumb up if they would be afraid to walk down that street and she put her thumb up too, along with her students. In this way, Erin was demonstrating the necessity of honest reflections about race by teachers, not simply students (Milner,

2010). Compared to her students, Erin had experienced a lifetime of societal messages that had taught her to associate fear with the images she had shown. In that moment, she was demonstrating how she, too, had been implicitly and explicitly taught to think and feel about differences, and that consciously and courageously naming this is the first step toward learning to deconstruct these powerful and dangerous messages.

209

Therefore, teaching about race and racism requires parallel work. While teaching their students to monitor how race affects their lives and the lives of others, the teachers monitored how race, as one of their identities, affected the ways they taught. This work was crucial and each of the teachers shared that this was not something that could simply happen prior to teaching these courses; rather, it was essential to occur alongside their teaching. Looking back across their year, this was something of which each teacher had come to recognize the essentiality; moreover, discussing and unpacking this work together with their students, were processes that were nuanced, complicated, and ongoing. Subsequently, the teachers discovered that the primary purpose of their courses was not in covering content, but in building trust and fostering discussions that would support students’ recognition that racism works as a system with multiple levels— individual, interpersonal, institutional, and cultural. From there, students could discover meaningful pathways for operating as allies and accomplices in their own lives as a powerful approach to slowly unravel the tangled network that is racism.

What challenges do the teachers say they encounter when teaching race with predominantly White, affluent middle-school students?

The biggest challenge that each of the teachers reflected on as they looked back across their year was resistance. This is not unique to this study. Echoed across the research around teaching about race with White students is the challenge of resistance

(Castagno, 2008; Flynn, 2012; Haviland, 2008). Each teacher’s experiences contained specific examples of this. They reported that some students rejected the notion that racism still exists. Others expressed that examples of racism presented in the course were, perhaps, coincidences or isolated events. In addition, the teachers shared that for some

210

students, their silence during the course was a type of resistance. Each of the teachers shared that their students were not rude or distruptive. However, it felt especially heavy for some of the teachers to navigate such resistance and themselves resist the urge to shut down dissenting conversations and statements.

Another challenge for teachers that emerged across the data was the limitations of teaching a course on race and racism within the confinement of a school quarter. Each of the teachers felt a 10-week timeframe was too short to cover the breadth of issues related to race, and by the end of the quarter, they had just scratched the surface. Further, for some of the teachers, like Jamie and Reid, who did not know their students previously, it took time to develop a rapport and trust in which their students felt safe opening up to their teachers. For some students, this happened more quickly, while others needed more time. Since this course was designed to fit into an already existing school structure, the teachers are continuing to reflect on possible changes that could allow for longer courses.

An additional challenge that emerged was the teachers’ noticings about the students of color and how this course seemed to affect them. Each of the teachers reported having few students of color in their courses, while some teachers had no students of color in their course during a particular quarter or two. This led to a few dilemmas and discoveries.

First, the teachers shared that when students of color were present during these courses, they tended to be silent during discussions. This was problematic because it was challenging to gauge how students were feeling and whether they felt “othered” and uncomfortable to be the source of a topic in their predominantly White school district.

Another problem was that a course created for students to develop racial-literacy skills

211

required making room for errors. For example, some of the teachers explained that at times, a White student used inaccurate or antiquated racial terms during discussions, such as Negro or oriental or the ethnic descriptor “colored.” Some teachers made the decision not to rush to correct this speech so as not to halt discussions. Instead, they used the correct terms in their responses and provided space for students to incorporate them into their own speech. However, how did this affect, for example, an African American or

Asian American student in the classroom to have to endure the errors of their peers and wait patiently for amelioration?

Second, during one particular quarter when there were no students of color in the classroom, one teacher shared that the White students seemed to engage more with the content and discussions. Whether this was a function of the chemistry of the particular students during that quarter or whether White students had felt inhibited by the presence of their peers of color during other quarters was unclear. However, the teacher noted that the students were a bit more vocal. There was more risk taking in this space and a willingness to ask questions.

These discoveries and dilemmas led to wonderings about the potentials of affinity groups in racial-justice work in White-dominated spaces.

How do teachers respond to these challenges?

In order to navigate and ultimately mitigate resistance by students, each teacher employed distinct methods in their courses. These methods evolved across the year as each teacher learned that the course was most effective when its direction rested in the students’ hands. This required the teacher to forgo many of the structures they had put in

212

place when they developed the curriculum and to instead lean into the ambiguity of how a particular session might go.

They also learned to lean into their strengths as English language arts teachers, which was crucial in helping them to navigate the uncertainties they experienced as teachers. The most powerful way the teachers responded to the challenges they faced was to continually reexamine their instructional methods to provide more experiences for students to talk to each other. During these parts of the course, the teachers became more of observers rather than facilitators. For example, all teachers expressed that students were most engaged during the sessions when they were able to investigate a topic or issue with peers. Creating opportunities for partner and group work increased the amount of discussion about race and racism in the courses. While students may not have applied racial-literacy terms with great sophistication, accuracy, or even at all during these discussions, the teachers learned that what mattered was that their students—not them— were doing the talking.

Each teacher entered into the work of developing and teaching about racial justice steeped in the belief that this work matters significantly and especially for White students who, without such exposure, run the risk of perpetuating racism (Derman-Sparks &

Ramsey, 2006). However, for this work to be effective, they learned that it was important to place emphasis on students’ enjoyment in the work and providing opportunities for lightness and fun. Prioritizing this over covering content helped students to engage more in the topics and become more comfortable talking about race. When teachers took time to have more casual, non-raced-based conversations with students that focused on their

213

interests and to incorporate teambuilding activities unrelated to race and racism, students responded more favorably to the course.

In the following sections, I discuss various implications and considerations of this study for practice, policy, and research.

Implications for Developing and Teaching Curriculum About Race and Racism

This study contributes to the research on teaching about race and racism in K-12 schools with predominantly White students. It provided an extended gaze into the practices of teachers who willingly engaged conversations about race in their classrooms and who developed curriculum to teach courses on this topic. From this gaze, I discuss three implications that emerged as potential areas to inform the practice of developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum. Specifically, I discuss the importance of teachers learning strategies that can raise their comfort levels when facilitating conversations about race, the ways taking a researcher stance advances the work of teaching and learning about race and racism, and identifying ways to assess courses on race that help to refine teaching.

Raising Teachers’ Comfortability Discussing Race and Racism

Teaching courses about race and racism will attract a particular kind of teacher, one who is genuinely interested in and committed to work focused on equity and inclusion. However, research has shown that many teachers reported feeling uncomfortable discussing race and racism with students. This is particularly true for

White teachers working with White students (Haviland, 2008; Lewis, 2001). To increase

214

comfort levels, teachers can focus on building a curriculum that primarily allows them to get to know their students in positive, meaningful ways.

Therefore, it can be particularly helpful for them to bridge content that allows them the ability to delay, at first, discussions around particularly challenging topics related to race and racism when they facilitate conversations with students. For example, rather than launching immediately into conversations about privilege and White supremacy, teachers can build in lessons around identity. This gives teachers who may be anxious some latitude and comfortability and can help all students feel that they have a place in the classroom. This can be a starting place from which teachers can build a foundation of trust as they move toward conversations about race and racism that can be challenging and tricky.

It is also important that teachers trust they need not have the answers to every question students pose about race. To be successful in taking up this work with students involves understanding the value of responses such as “That’s an interesting question,” “I want to think more about this,” and “Let me come back to this.” These kinds of responses validate students’ questions, rather than dismissing them due to teacher discomfort around knowledge. They also demonstrate for students the complexity of this work and how there are seldom easy answers or solutions. In fact, seeking answers, particularly in predominantly White spaces, requires research to first learn about these issues and then reflection to more fully grasp their impact.

Finally, it is essential for teachers to avoid isolation when teaching about race and racism. Having a tremendous amount of autonomy in this work is both necessary and daunting. It is necessary in order for teachers to be truly responsive to students in this

215

work. However, teachers will make mistakes. Some students may feel unheard or misrepresented. Parents who disagree with the content and implementation may express their concerns to administrators. Opportunities to unpack the pitfalls of this work are critical as they can dramatically influence the decisions a teacher makes, including the materials and methods used. Working with colleagues can help to illuminate new pathways that can positively impact how students experience this work. Support for teachers—including working on the curriculum, teaching alongside colleagues, and meeting weekly with administrators to discuss both the progress of the course and any concerns that may arise—can help teachers gain comfort and confidence.

Taking a Researcher Stance When Teaching and Learning About Race

Educators often encourage their students of all ages to ask and think deeply about the questions that puzzle them. This is also true of educators who take on the work of teaching about race. When teachers and students take on a researcher stance in courses on race, it fosters inquiry and opens up spaces for exploration around the issues they have noticed and are concerned about. However, it is crucial for educators to balance this approach with teaching that is unafraid to drive up important issues that students may miss and does not allow them to be whitewashed, as can often happen particularly in predominantly White contexts (Bonilla-Silva, 2013; Derman-Sparks & Ramsey, 2006;

Lewis, 2001; Macaluso, 2017).

Assuming a researcher stance when teaching and learning about race and racism places questions at the center. From this stance, educators help students realize that the goal of living in a world that is racially just starts with asking important questions and

216

being committed to seeking answers that may not be found easily or quickly. In fact, essential to this stance is developing curriculum and teaching in ways that provide students with opportunities to think. As a result, students respond to curriculum with interest and curiosity. For example, each teacher in this study shared that as they revised and strengthened their facilitation methods across the year, students most frequently responded to instruction with similar versions of the statement, “I never thought about it that way.” From a researcher stance, teachers and students become increasingly more comfortable having conversations about race and have unresolved ideas because of the complex nature of the questions they explore. In short, taking a researcher stance when learning and teaching about race and racism involves moving from goals that are content- based to those that are consciousness-based.

Being a collector of stories and sharing them are essential to opening up wide spaces of possibilities for teaching and learning about race and racism. Teachers can collect these stories directly from their students over the years, using pseudonyms to safeguard privacy. However, for teachers working in predominantly White schools who may be unable to collect these kinds of stories from their students, it is especially important that they find these stories by researching. For example, using the stories of popular children’s authors of color who have written personal narratives and memoirs about their experiences with racism was one approach the teachers in this study used that resonated with students. Keeping these stories in their metaphorical back pockets enables teachers to share them often with students to support their learning. Teachers can ask students if they have seen versions of the experiences described in these stories in their own lives and in the world. In this way, teachers and students assume a researching-the-

217

world stance, where they seek out, listen to, and learn the stories and experiences of others.

Asssessing Courses on Race and Racism

Courses developed to help students explore and come to understand more about race and racism offer unique kinds of experiences from other courses students take.

Therefore, assessing this kind of class is different from assessing, for example, math, science, and social studies. However, there are several ways in which educators can take measure of the effectiveness of courses about race and racism in order to inform and improve their practice. This begins with educators keeping the purpose of racial-justice courses at the forefront of their minds, which is providing students with opportunities to explore and reflect on critical questions and engage in conversations about race.

One way educators can assess courses on race is by keeping expectations low in terms of the traditional ways in which academics are measured. By this I mean deliberately avoiding assessing students’ on-the-page literacy and determining whether they can provide dictionary definitions for specific terms. Instead, the quality of their writing is in its reflectiveness rather than the actual language used. Teachers can focus primarily on the quality of the discourse about race in their classrooms and students’ approximations as they apply their learning. Using qualitative measurements can help teachers to make assessments. This includes teachers asking questions that help them to make keen observations about students such as:

• Are students talking?

• Are all of the students talking?

218

• Are students talking during all parts of a conversation?

• Are students engaging in conversations that can be both serious and playful?

• Do students understand the terminology?

• Can students apply and use terms correctly?

• Do these terms open up students’ ability to recognize issues related to race

and racism or to see more about these issues?

Although some of the discourse with and between students may not be as sophisticated as educators may hope, what is important is assessing whether students are having conversations about race. This is what matters. If conversations are happening and students are participating because they want to participate, then the course has reached one of its major goals.

One difficulty in assessing this type of course is to determine what difference, if any, this kind of course makes in students’ own lives and whether or not students put their knowledge and developing ideas into action. Will students speak up as allies and accomplices when they recognize racism in their own lives? Will, for example, a student interrupt a joke shared by a peer that is racially insensitive? Measurements for this can be nebulous and fluctuating at best. However, communications from students and parents can provide some clarity.

Creating spaces for students to share about their experiences in courses on race can make it possible for teachers to refine and revise instruction based on this feedback.

For example, there is much that can be gleaned when students complete surveys with the option of anonymity. Teachers can provide the same or similar questions at the start of the course and again at the end of the course. One question might be How often do you

219

witness instances of racism? Some of the teachers of this study included this question on surveys and noted an increase in students indicating that they have often witnessed instances of racism. One conclusion that can be drawn is that by the end of the course, there was an increase in students’ awareness of racism. In this way, educators can use quantitative data to measure the ways in which questions such as this increase or decrease from the start of the course to its end. Including open-ended questions and prompts provides opportunities for students to share additional ideas and reflections that can help guide educators as they make choices about materials and methods in courses on race and racism. Examples of this include What topics would you like to discuss? and Please share any concerns you have about the course.

When educators hear from parents and family members who share the types of conversations that are occurring at home, they can determine how students are processing content, sharing ideas, and applying them outside of the classroom. Sending surveys to parents and families that invite them to share information about their child’s experience can help teachers determine how students feel about the course. Families can also provide a window into the ways this kind of course helps students bring new lenses to the world.

For example, are students able to identify specific examples of colorblind ideology or representation? The parent of a student in one of the teachers’ courses shared such an experience. Upon reviewing various camp brochures, a parent shared that her child remarked that all of the children were White or Asian and the brochure was a good example of lack of representation. These sorts of applciations that extend beyond the boundaries of school, when shared with educators, can provide a glimpse into the

220

difference these courses make in students’ lives that can then inform the pathways teachers can create to achieve the goals of courses on race and racism.

Considerations for Policy

Policies that support students’ development of racial-literacy in K-12 classrooms can advance the work of racial justice. Several considerations about policy are informed by this study. In the following sections, I discuss recommendations for teacher preparation programs and their role in supporting teachers’ racial literacy development, the importance of ongoing professional development for educators and faculty, and ways to revision curriculum and school structures as spaces that include teaching about race and racism.

Teacher Preparation and Education Programs

Although teacher preparation and education were not the focus of this research, this study showed that teaching about race and racism impacts not only students but also teachers. What can be learned from this study is that teaching about race and racism is challenging, nuanced work along with the kinds of preparation that the teachers did that enabled them to take up this work. Such preparation included transformative professional development experiences that teacher education programs might consider. In order to situate considerations around teacher preparation and education programs, I include some context for this.

In a 2015 report published by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of

Postsecondary Education, 447,116 individuals were enrolled in traditional teacher

221

preparation and education programs in colleges and universities. Yet, there was a stark disparity between the demographic make-up of teaching candidates and K-12 students.

While 73% of teacher candidates identified as White, 49% of students did not. Although the race and ethnicity of teachers in these programs differ vastly from the population of students in K-12 classrooms, little attention has been devoted to training and coursework for educators on the racial and ethnic identities of their students and how to teach about race and racism (Harper, 2017). Moreover, engaging discussions about race in the classroom when teaching students who are predominantly White can especially be perceived as unimportant by White teachers (Lewis, 2001).

Based on 10 years of research on race in higher education programs, Harper

(2017) found that “Colleges of education graduate thousands of educated people, mostly

White, without a proper course of study on race, people of color, and structural racism.

This makes them partly responsible for the perpetuation of racial inequity in schools and our society” (Speech at American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education). One thing teacher education programs can consider is to make courses on race and ethnicity an important part of college and university teacher preparation programs to help teachers acquire racial literacy. Implicit bias courses as well as those that provide a historical and comteporary scope of racial inequities have the potential to increase the likelihood that teachers can and will engage students in substantive conversations about race in their classrooms. Because it is unlikely that prospective teachers have been taught racial- literacy skills during their K-12 schooling, in order to interrupt this pattern of silence and help teachers lean into their discomfort, teacher education programs can provide spaces

222

for learning about race and racism and preparing to facilitate these conversations with students.

Further, courses on critical literacy could be another way that teacher preparation programs can support educators in teaching about race and racism. If critical literacy becomes an approach that is commonplace classrooms, students can begin to see the

“everyday through new lenses” (Van Sluys, 2002). Such practice can make identifying social inequities, including racism, and having critical conversations a way of being in classrooms where critical literacy is implemented, not simply in one lesson or unit, but as an approach to teaching and learning.

Professional Development

The teachers in this study, some of whom identified as White, were unique in the sense that they specifically sought ongoing professional development about race.

However, research has shown this is seldom the case for White educators who represent the owerwhelming majority of teachers in the United States. As previously mentioned, one of the biggest roadblocks to engaging in discourse around race and racism is teacher discomfort, specifically that of White educators. This study contributes to the research by demonstrating the possibilities for conversations about race with students when teachers have had a variety of professional development experiences and are comfortable facilitating these kinds of discussions.

Administrators can develop both short- and long-term plans for professional development that specifically focuses on supporting faculty in their understanding of the importance of them learning about issues related to race and racism and, in turn, taking

223

up this work in the classroom with students. Powerful professional development

experiences for educators could include engaging in workshops similar to those

developed in the racial-justice curriculum of this study. Examples of this are learning

about implicit bias and how to interrogate this, unpacking the reasons why colorblindness

does not work, and recognizing and understanding privilege. Such exeperiences can help

raise educators’ awareness that race has been an important factor in the way that

institutions are designed and that it profoundly impacts their decision making, both

consciously and unconsciously, in the classroom and beyond. Short-term plans can

include contacting local organizations that specialize in trainings about race and

providing this kind of professional development for all faculty as well as administrators

themselves. Long-term plans can include creating ongoing plans for professional

development on race as well as creating orientation guidelines on previous work for new

faculty.

While this work can be inherently difficult, it is important that this does not

become a deterrent to professional development on race. To do so adversely affects the

lives of all students. With an ongoing commitment to continued professional

development, it becomes easier for teachers to develop the tools needed to inform

curriculum and instruction in racially just ways.

Curriculum and School Structures

Research has shown that children as early as preschool recognize racial differences and children enter kindergarten already having an understanding about societal hierarchy when it comes to racial groups (Winkler, 2009). The middle-school

224

gaze provided by this research can inform elementary and high-school practices around teaching about race and racism. Waiting until middle school or high school to begin such work, as shown in this study, adds further challenges for teachers, such as resistance from students who have been indoctrinated into colorblind ideologies and other dangerous messages about race. Teaching that helps students acquire racial literacy beginning in elementary school is critical in order to interrupt societal messages. But a common misconception is that talking about race is divisive and polarizing, which can encourage teachers to believe that a colorblindness approach toward curriculum is the answer, as has been noted across the research, including by the teachers of this study who made observations about their colleagues. In fact, silences around race create missed opportunities for students to acquire the necessary tools to develop racial literacy.

Similar to the development of “Sparks” which was the teachers’ first attempt to help the middle school in this study address race in the classroom, schools might begin by determining a few lessons they believe can help students learn and have discussions about race and racism. Teaching teams can collaborate on the lessons they believe are most essential for their specific grade level and plan when to teach them across the school year such as once per month. For example, while a 5th grade team of teachers might begin by helping students understand that race is socially constructed rather than biological, the

8th grade team of teachers might engage students in lessons on implicit bias. Such lessons might include reading an article or picture book together or inviting students to work in groups to investigate a topic using digital texts. If classroom teachers have not received professional development that supports their knowledge and confidence, these lessons could be co-taught with other educators such as guidance counselors. This could be a way

225

to start to take up this work with students. Educators can use the time between lessons to evaluate their effectiveness and make adjustements.

One obstacle that can delay the development and teaching of curriculum about race is determining where such instruction fits within the structures of schools.

Administrators and educators can set guidelines for how such work is brought into existing curriculum and school structures and create new structures to facilitate curriculum and teaching about race. These decisions can be informed by multicultural education and critical literacy principles to include revisioning curriculum calendars, standards, and student schedules.

For example, units of study can be rewritten and created to include texts that feature characters or people of color that are also written by authors of color. Study group discussions can occur during team meetings where educators learn about movements such as We Need Diverse Books and #ownvoices that have spotlighted the importance of all students accessing a rich variety of texts that help them see themselves and learn about the experiences of others. These texts can help students explore the complexity of experiences of various racial and ethnic groups, and teachers can tap into these diverse texts in myriad ways. For example, schools can outline practices for creating racially inclusive biography projects about artists, scientists, and historical figures. Grants can be written to secure funds for culturally-diverse classroom libraries that provide opportunities for students to learn continuously about the lives of those different from themselves, beyond historical-fiction contexts, during read-alouds and independent reading. Critical literacy practices can become commonplace across the content areas where teachers regularly engage students in a process of deconstructing and

226

reconstructing texts by considering questions such as: From whose perspective are we learning? Whose voices are silenced? What do we miss as a result? Such practices can support students as they learn to recognize power, privilege, and the inequities this causes, and understand that disrupting these forces involves actively seeking out counternarratives that amplify the stories and experiences of those silenced and marginalized.

Through a process of vertical articulation across grade levels and content areas, curriculum standards can reflect the goal of developing racial literacy and the plan for how this will occur across the grades. A revisioning of school structures can involve creating new ones particularly at the middle- and high-school levels. An example of a new structure might be a course that students engage each year, such as the one from this study, which provides an intentional space to center discussions about race and racism.

Further, when developing district calendars, administrators can safeguard times during the year beyond, for example, Hispanic Heritage Month and Black History Month, for assemblies and other school-wide events that showcase the achievements and contributions of various racial and ethnic groups.

The most salient ways that the beliefs and values of a school district are made visible are by its curriculum and school structures. Advancing the work of racial justice requires schools to do more than simply incorporate statements about equity and inclusion into their mission statements and mottos. While there is no binder or one-size- fits all approach to teaching about race and racism, such work can begin by changing habit and behaviors—from disrupting the practice of silence to intentionally having conversations about race in the classroom. Such work may begin slowly, but

227

purposefully. Changing habits and behaviors may influence hearts and mindsets of both teachers and students, which can allow this work to increase, deepen, and flourish.

Implications for Future Research and Critique of the Study

I would like to draw attention to an important area for continued research that has emerged from this study. Additional research on the effects of courses about race and racism on students of color in White-dominant spaces can help inform the practices of educators who take up this work. This study demonstrated a silence of the voices of students of color, which raised the question of whether the course and its curriculum were helpful to some students, while harmful to others who may have felt othered in this space.

Research around the possibilities of affinity group spaces could provide insights into this delimma. Typically, affinity groups are exclusive spaces where individuals connect and build community and camaraderie with others who share a racial and ethnic identity and heritage (Parsons & Ridley, 2012). However, further research can demonstrate the possibilities of this in White-dominated contexts. For example, perhaps a broadened conceptualization of the word affinity is needed in White schools where few students of color represent any one racial and ethnic group. This leads to a variety of questions that can be explored in such research including:

• What might be new characteristics of affinity groups in White-dominated

spaces where there are students from various racial and ethnic backgrounds

coming together?

• Are these new types of affinity groups effective?

228

• How can schools navigate the challenge of finding teachers to facilitate such

groupings when it is unlikely that their racial and cultural backgrounds mirror

the identities of their students?

• How often would affinity groups meet?

• Would affinity groups run concurrently with racial-justice courses or at a

separate time?

It seems that research on the possibilities of stretching the limitations of the concept of affinity groups could provide opportunities for students of color to discuss their experiences in courses on race and racism in predominantly White schools within a safe, supportive space. From this space, educators can better gauge the impact of courses on students of color and revision curriculum and instruction that increase their comfort levels.

Subsequently, a critique of this research is, in fact, the very nature of it. The work of critical educators is to draw from the knowledge and experiences of students and, from this space, develop and engage curriculum and teaching with this in mind. Therefore, when teaching about race and racism in predominantly White spaces, Whiteness can inevitably be centered during this process. I continue to wrestle with this dichotomy and wonder whether it is possible to do both—to make central the stories and experiences of people of color while also keeping at the center the knowledge and needs of White students in a course on race. Throughout this research, I found myself grappling with my prioritization of empathy—that perhaps there was too much emphasis on making learning about race and racism palatable to privileged and entitled White students. I leave this research continuing to wrestle with how to do this work without coddling White students

229

and wondering about the implicit messages communicated to students as a result of this study and its methods. Which opportunities for learning about race and racism may have been missed? And what more can be done to make central the needs of students of color in these spaces who have navigated the realities of racism daily and who were spotlighted as a result of this course? Further research specifically on students of color and their perspectives in predominantly White contexts in courses on race can shed light on their experiences and illuminate new understandings.

Concluding Thoughts

My brother once said, “If you ain’t got no flies in your kitchen, then you ain’t cookin’.” What my brother meant by this is that cooking is messy business; therefore, a few flies are expected and not at all a deterrant from enjoying a good meal. I share this because I believe that this metaphor best represents my reflections on this research study.

The image of the fly to symbolize an irritant or spoiler is not new. One can turn to the history of idioms such as “a fly in the ointment” and the racialized version “a fly in the buttermilk” to understand such usage. At the core of both of these idioms is the notion that the fly is an annoyance that spoils something valuable. The realities of developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum is work that is inherently flawed, messy, and complex, particularly in predominantly White school districts where it can be seen, like the fly in these idioms, as undesirable. It is imperfect practice as educators relentlessly explore the boundaries of this work, seeking to understand where students are and what they are ready for, while recognizing breakthroughs and using them as building blocks for further work.

230

From my perspective, the fly is not a spoiler; instead, it is a disrupter that breaks the façade of an all-too-clean and perfect setting. The fly is both a siren and a sleuth; it alerts us to what is hidden by actively searching for and revealing the problem. The curriculum developers and teachers of this study identified a major issue regarding the practices around teaching about race and racism within our school district. Calling attention to this issue was part of our cycle of advocacy that led to the development and teaching of courses about race and racism. Throughout this study, we shared what we believed was our district’s awareness of its issues around race as well as the ways the district had obfuscated them. We were, unabashedly, the flies in our kitchen.

When asked to describe their experiences developing and teaching a racial-justice curriculum, each of the teachers provided a three-word summary. Erin stated frightening, enlightening, and rewarding; Jamie named humbling, refreshing, and challenging; and

Reid offered imperfect, exciting, and communal. The words I contributed take into account the experiences not only of developing and teaching the curriculum, but also of conducting this research study, and my deep and personal connections to this research and the researched. I shared empowering, urgent, and redemptive. It is my hope that this research provides insight into the words each of the teachers chose to encapsulate their experiences and makes a case for the significance of teaching about race and racism.

231

REFERENCES

Aldridge, D. (2006). The limits of master narratives in history textbooks: An analysis of representations of Martin Luther King, Jr. Teachers College Record, 108(4), 662-686.

Avila, J., & Pandya, J. Z. (2013). Moving critical literacies forward: A new look at praxis across contexts. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Banks, J. (2001). Multicultural education: Its effects on students’ racial and gender role attitudes. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 617-627). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Banks, J. A. (2006a). Improving race relations in schools: From theory and research to practice. Journal of Social Issues, 62(3), 607-614.

Banks, J. (2006b). Researching race, culture, and difference: Epistemological challenges and possibilities. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 773-792). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Banks, J. A. (1993). The canon debate, knowledge construction, and multicultural education. Educational Researcher, 22(5), 4-14.

Bean, T., & Moni, K. (2003). Developing students’ critical literacy: Exploring identify construction in young adult fiction. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 46(8), 638-648.

Behrman, E. (2006). Teaching about language, power, and text: A review of classroom practices that support critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49(6), 490-498.

Bell, D. (2005). Silent covenants: Brown vs. Board of Education and the unfilled hopes for racial reform. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.

Bolgatz, J. (2005). Revolutional talk: Elementary teacher and students discuss race in a social studies class. The Social Studies, 96(6), 259-264.

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2013). Racism without racists. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Bruchac, J. (1998). The heart of a chief. New York, NY: Puffin.

232

Calkins, L., Robb, A., & Strang-Campbell, E. (2018). Social issues book clubs: Reading for empathy and advocacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Castagno, A. E. (2008). I don’t want to hear that: Legitimating whiteness through silence in schools. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 39(3), 314-333.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London, UK: Sage.

Cherry-Paul, S. (2018). Shatter the silence: Fostering a culture of racial justice work. Literacy Today, 35(4), 30-31.

Cherry-Paul, S. (2017, August 17). If you think racism is too political for your classroom, think about what your silence says (Heinemann Publishing, Ed.). Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://medium.com/@heinemann/if-you-think-racism-is-too- political-for-your-classroom-think-about-what-your-silence-says-a025685fb982

Chokshi, N. (2016, August 22). How #blacklivesmatter came to define a movement. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/23/us/how-blacklivesmatter- came-to-define-a-movement.html

Clarke, L. (2006). Talk to the hand, girl: Using texts to explore student voice. The English Journal, 95(3), 56-60.

Clarke, L., & Whitney, E. (2009). Walking in their shoes: Using multiple perspectives texts as a bridge to critical literacy. The Reading Teacher, 62(6), 530-534.

Cobham, B. A., & Parker, T. L. (2007). Resituating race into the movement toward multiculturalism and social justice. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 85-93.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009a). Inquiry as stance. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2009b). Teacher research as stance. In S. E. Noffke & B. Somekh (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of educational action research (pp. 39- 49). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cochran-Smith, M. (2001). Multicultural education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 91-93.

Comber, B., & Simpson, A. (2001). Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

233

Comber, B. (2001). Critical literacies and local action: Teacher knowledge and a ‘new’ research agenda. In B. Comber & A. Simpson (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 271-280). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Comber, B., Thomson, P., & Wells, M. (2001). Critical literacy finds a “place”: Writing and social action in a low-income Australian grade 2/3 classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 101(4), 451-464.

Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2018, from https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/cc/

Cooper, H. (2009). Attorney General chided for language on race. New York Times, March 7. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/ 08race.html

Curtis, C. P. (1997/2013). The Watsons go to Birmingham: 1963. New York, NY: Yearling.

Delaney, C. (2007). World War II and beyond: Middle school inquiry and critical literacy. New England Reading Association, 43(2), 30-35.

Delpit, L. (2008). The skin that we ppeak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom. New York, NY: The New Press.

Derman-Sparks, L., & Ramsey, P. G. (2006). What if all the kids are white? Anti-bias multicultural education with young children and families. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Duncan-Andrade, J. M., & Morrell, E. (2008). Art of critical pedagogy: Possibilities for moving from theory to practice in urban schools. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Fishman, S. M., & McCarthy, L. P. (2000). Unplayed tapes: A personal history of collaborative teacher research. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Flynn, J. (2012). Critical pedagogy with the oppressed and the oppressors: Middle school students discuss racism and white privilege. Middle Grades Research Journal, 7(2), 95-110.

Foss, A. (2002). Peeling the onion: Teaching critical literacy with students of privilege. Language Arts, 79(5), 393-403.

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder and Herder.

234

Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. West Port, CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Gainer, J. S. (2010). Critical media literacy in middle school: Exploring the politics of representation. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53(5), 364-373.

Garcia, S. E. (2017, October 20). The woman who created #MeToo long before hashtags. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/20/us/me-too- movement-tarana-burke.html

Gay, G. (2004). The importance of multicultural education. InD. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader. New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.

Gay, G. (2012). Multicultural education, purposes and goals. In J. Banks (Ed.), Encyclopedia of diversity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gee, J. (2001). Critical literacy/socially perceptive literacy: A study of language in action. In Critical literacy: A collection of articles from the Australian Literacy Educators’ Association (pp. 15-39). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Giroux, H. (1993). Literacy and the politics of difference. In C. Lankshear & P. L. McLaren (Eds.), Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern (pp. 367- 378). Albany, NY: State University of New York press.

Giroux, H. (1997). Rewriting the discourse of racial identity: Towards a pedagogy and politics of whiteness. Harvard Educational Review, 67(2), 285-321.

Harding, V. (2009). Hope and history: Why we must share the story of the movement. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Harper, S. (2017). Prepare all teachers to discuss race, champion equity. Speech at 69th annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

Haviland, V. S. (2008). Things get glossed over: Whiteness and multicultural education. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 40-54.

Heffernan, L. & Lewison, M. (2005). What’s lunch got to do with it? Critical literacy and the discourse of the lunchroom. Language Arts, 83(2), 107-117.

Heffernan, L. & Lewison, M. (2009). Keep your eyes on the prize: Critical stance in the middle school classroom. Voices From the Middle, 17(2), 19-27.

235

Hill, M. L., & Vasudevan, L. (2008). Media, learning, and sites of possibility. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Janks, H. (2000). Domination, access, diversity and design: A synthesis for critical literacy education. Educational Review, 52(2), 175-186.

Jones, S. (2006). Girls, social class, and literacy: What teachers can do to make a difference. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum: 1893-1958. Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Kulish, N., Yee, V., Dickerson, C., Robbins, L., Santos, F. & Medina, J. (2017, February 22). Trump’s immigration policies explained. Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/21/us/trump-immigration-policies- deportation.html

Ladson-Billings, G. (1996). Your blues ain’t like mine: Keeping issues of race and racism on the multicultural agenda. Theory Into Practice, 35(4), 248-255.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemologies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 257-277). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2004). Landing on the wrong note: The price we paid for Brown. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 3-13.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2005). Differing concepts of citizenship and community sites of civic development. In N. Noddings (Ed.), Educating citizens for global awareness. New York, NY: Teachers College Press

Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2012). Critical perspectives on race and schooling. In J. Banks (Ed.), Encyclopedia of diversity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 47-68.

Lalik, R., & Oliver, K. L. (2007). Differences and tensions in implementing a pedagogy of critical literacy with adolescent girls. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(1), 46-70.

236

Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research from design to implementation. New York, NY: Open University Press.

Lankshear, C., & McLaren, P. (1993). Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern (SUNY series). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Lee, H. (1960/1982). To kill a mockingbird. New York, NY: Grand Central Publishing.

Leland, C., & Harste, J. (2000). Critical literacy: Enlarging the space of the possible. Primary Voices, 9(2), 3-6.

Leland, C., Harste, J., Ociepka, A., Lewison, A., & Vasquez, V. (1999). Exploring critical literacy: You can hear a pin drop. Language Arts, 77(1), 70-78.

Lesley, M. (2008). Access and resistance to dominant forms of discourse: Critical literacy and at risk high school students. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(3), 174-194.

Lewis, A. E. (2001). There is no race in the schoolyard: Color-blind ideology in an (almost) all-white school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 781-811.

Lewison, M., & Heffernan, L. (2009). Keep your eyes on the prize: Critical stance in the middle school classroom. Voices From the Middle, 17(2), 19-27.

Lewison, M., Flint, A. S., & Van Sluys, K. (2002). Taking on critical literacy: The journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts, 79(5), 382-392.

Lewison, M., Leland, C., & Harste, J. C. (2008). Creating critical classrooms: K-8 reading and writing with an edge. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2008). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research (pp. 251-291). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Naturalistic inquiry. Brantford, Ontario: W. Ross MacDonald School Resource Services Library.

Locke, T., & Cleary, A. (2011). Critical literacy as an approach to literary study in the multicultural, high-school classroom. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(1), 119-139.

Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1997). Shaping the social practices of reading. In S. Muspratt, A. Freebody, & P. Luke (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies (pp. 185-225). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

237

Luke A. (2000). Critical literacy in Australia. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43(5), 448-461.

Luttrell, W. (2010). Qualitative educational research: Readings in reflexive methodology and transformative practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Macaluso, M. (2017). Teaching To Kill a Mockingbird today: Coming to terms with race, racism, and America’s novel. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 61(3), 279-287.

MacPhee, J. (1997). “That’s not fair!”: A white teacher reports on white first graders’ responses to multicultural literature. Language Arts, 74(1), 33-40.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.

McIntosh, P. (1989). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Peace and Freedom, 10-12.

McKissack, P. (1997). Run away home. New York, NY: Scholastic.

McLaren, P. (1998). Revolutionary pedagogy in post-revolutionary times: Rethinking the political economy of critical education. Educational Theory, 48(4), 431-462.

McLaughlin, M., & Devoogd, G. (2004). Critical literacy as comprehension: Expanding reader response. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(1), 52-62.

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moller, K. (2002). Providing support for dialogue in literature discussions about social justice. Language Arts, 79(6), 467-477.

Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, M. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.

Milner, H. R. (2003). Teacher reflection and race in cultural contexts: History, meanings, and methods in teaching. Theory Into Practice, 42(3), 173-180.

238

Milner, H. R. (2005). Developing a multicultural curriculum in a predominantly white teaching context: Lessons from an African American teacher in a suburban English classroom. Curriculum Inquiry, 35(4), 391-427.

Morrell, E. (2008). Critical literacy and urban youth: Pedagogies of access, dissent, and liberation. New York, NY: Routledge.

Murillo, E. G., Jr., Villenas, S., Trinidad Galvan, R., Sanchez Munoz, J., Martinez, C., & Machado-Cases, M. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of Latinos and education: Theory, research and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Myers, W. D. (1999). Monster. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Nash, K., Howar, J., Miller, E., Boutte, G., Johnson, G., & Reid, L. (2018). Critical racial literacy in homes schools and communities: Propositions for early childhood contexts. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 19(3), 256-273.

Noguera, P. (2003). City schools and the American dream: Reclaiming the promise of public education. New York, NY: Teacher College Press.

Obama discusses Holder’s ‘cowards’ remark. (2009, March 7). Retrieved February 20, 2015, from http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/03/07/obama-discusses- holders-cowards-comment/

Park, J. Y. (2012). A different kind of reading instruction: Using visualizing to bridge reading comprehension and critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(7), 629-640.

Parsons, J., & Ridley, K. (2012, Winter). Identity, affinity, reality. NAIS Independent School Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.nais.org/MagazinesNewsletters/ ISMagazine/Pages/Identity-Affinity-Reality.aspx

Patterson, A., & Mellor, B. (2001). Teaching readings? In B. Comber & A. Simpson (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 119-134). London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Roberts, R. A., Bell, L. A., & Murphy, B. (2008). Flipping the script: Analyzing youth talk about race and racism. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 39(3), 334-354.

Rogers, R., & Mosley, M. (2006). Racial literacy in a second-grade classroom: Critical race theory, whiteness studies, and literacy research. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(4), 462-495.

239

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1969). Towards a transactional theory of reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1(1), 31-49.

Sanchez, R., & Gallagher, D. (2018, March 30). Black students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas HS want to be heard. Retrieved April 16, 2018, from https://www.cnn. com/2018/03/29/us/parkland-school-black-students-trnd/index.html

Schaffer, R. & Skinner, D. (2009). Performing race in four culturally diverse fourth grade classrooms: Silence, race talk, and the negotiation of social boundaries. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 40(3), 277-296.

Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2013). Building racial-literacy in first year composition. Teaching English in the Two Year College; Urbana, 40(4), 384-398.

Scott, E. (2018, March 31). Analysis | Black Parkland students worry: What happens to us when schools are over-policed? Retrieved April 15, 2018, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/03/31/black-parkland- students-worry-what-happens-to-us-when-schools-are-over-policed/

Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Shor, I., & Freire, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.

Shor, I. (1999). What is critical literacy? Journal of Pedagogy, Pluralism and Practice, 4(1), 1-30.

Singleton, G. E., & Linton, C. (2006). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin/Sage.

Sleeter, C. E. (1992). Restructuring schools for multicultural education. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), 141-148.

Sleeter, C., & Grant, C. (1987). An analysis of multicultural education in the United States. Harvard Educational Review, 57(4), 421-445.

Sluys, K. V., Lewison, M., & Flint, A. S. (2006). Researching critical literacy: A critical study of analysis of classroom discourse. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(2), 197-233.

Smith, J. K. (1993). After the demise of empiricism: The problem of judging social and education inquiry. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

240

Southern Poverty Law Center. (2011). Retrieved February 23, 2015, from https://www.splcenter.org/

Spector, K., & Jones, S. (2007). Constructing Anne Frank: Critical literacy and the Holocaust in eighth-grade English. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(1), 36-48.

Tatum, B. D. (1997). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria: And other conversations about race. New York, NY: Hatchette Book Group.

Toma, J. D. (2000). How getting close to your subjects makes qualitative data better. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 177-184.

Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S. Mexican youth and the politics of caring. Albany, NY: State Unviersity of New York Press.

Vasquez, V. M. (2010). Getting beyond “I like the book”: Creating space for critical literacy in K-6 classrooms. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Villenas, S. (2010). The colonizer/colonized Chicana ethnographer: Identity, marginalization, and co-optation in the field. In W. Luttrell (Ed.), Qualitative educational research (pp. 345-362). New York, NY: Routledge.

Wallace, K., & LaMotte, S. (2016, December 28). Aftermath of students’ viral ‘build a wall’ chant. Retrieved April 11, 2018, from https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/28/ health/build-a-wall-viral-video-collateral-damage-middle-school/index.html

Winkler, E. (2009). Children are not colorblind: How young children learn race. Retrieved April 4, 2018, from http://www.academia.edu/3094721/Children_ Are_Not_Colorblind_How_Young_Children_Learn_Race

Wolk, S. (2003). Teaching for critical literacy in social studies. The Social Studies, 94(3), 101-106.

Yin, R. K. (2006). Case study methods. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 111-122). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Young, S. (2012). Injustice and irony: Students respond to Japanese American internment picturebooks. Journal of Children’s Literature, 38(2), 37-49.

241

Appendix A

Focal Participant Recruitment Letter

Dear [NAME],

I am writing to ask for your participation in a research study I am conducting as part of a doctoral program I am completing. I am inviting you to participate in my research study about developing racial-justice curriculum for the middle-school course in your school: Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism. Additionally, I am interested in learning your experiences teaching this course. If you choose to participate in the research study, you will be invited to engage in the following activities:

1. Answer questions in a one-on-one interview about the development of the racial-justice curriculum. 2. Keep a teacher journal that you write field notes in 2 to 3 times per week after you teach the course. In these field notes you’ll write any thoughts or reflections you have about teaching the course. 3. Answer questions in a group interview with your colleagues who have written the racial- justice curriculum with you and who are also teaching the course. 4. Complete a short survey.

The goal of the study is to explore what can be learned from teachers who develop and teach racial-justice curriculum designed to help their predominantly White, affluent middle-school students become more race conscious. Therefore, I am looking for participants who meet one or both of the following requirements:

□ Developed racial-justice curriculum for middle-school students □ Teaching the course – Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism during 2018

Even if you do not meet all of the requirements listed above, you will still be considered for participation in this research study. If you choose to participate in this research study, your ideas and opinions are likely to be considered by audiences that include educational policy makers, researchers, administrators, and teachers who are interested in disrupting silences around race and racism in curriculum and schools.

Included with this letter, you will find a document titled “Informed Consent” procedures, including a description of the research and your rights should you agree to participate in the research study. Please reply to me via email at [email protected] to let me know if you would like to participate and which of the selection requirements you checked off from the list above. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via email or by calling or text messaging me at 914-843-3645. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Sonja Cherry-Paul

242

Appendix B

Informed Consent

243

244

245

Appendix C

Racial-Justice Curriculum

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism

Objective: This course aims to center discussions about race and racism. Digital texts, picture books, articles, essays and other types of texts will be used to spark conversations that help students recognize individual, interpersonal, and institutional racism. Essential to these courageous conversations is the racial literacy skills students will acquire that help them to recognize, name, and challenge various forms of everyday racism.

Goals: Students will: ● Understand that racism exists in many different arenas and capacities ● Understand that biases are often not obvious or immediately present on the surface ● Learn key racial literacy vocabulary such as: race; ethnicity; racism; racial justice; antiracism; allies; assumptions; colorblindness; discrimination; equity; identity; individual, interpersonal, and institutional racism; marginalized; microaggressions; narrative; counternarrative; oppression; prejudice; privilege; supremacy; systems; social, economic, and political conditions; stereotype ● Learn conversational strategies to discuss racism ● Learn tools to challenge topics ● Learn strategies to deconstruct canned, racial narratives and acquire counternarratives that provide perspectives that have been silenced

Common Core Connections: In compliance with Common Core Literacy Standards, this course provides students with frequent opportunities to analyze texts from diverse cultures and time periods, and contribute accurate, relevant information during discussions about race and racism. As a result, students will build a foundation of knowledge and utilize the vocabulary and tools demonstrated in the AOK class to speak about issues of race and racism in developmentally appropriate ways.

Speaking and Listening

Comprehension and Collaboration: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.SL.1 Prepare for and participate effectively in a range of conversations and collaborations with diverse partners, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.SL.2 Integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.SL.3 Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric.

246

Reading Key Ideas and Details: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.1 Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.7 Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.

Writing Research to Build and Present Knowledge: CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.8 Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.9 Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.

247

Day 1: Exploring Identities and Labels Students will explore their own identities along with the preconceived concept of labels and stereotypes.

Digital Text: The Lab Decoy: A Portrait Session with a Twist (3:17) This digital text explores the perceptions of the character of a person once a label has been applied through a photo shoot of a man assigned 6 different labels photographed by six different photographers. Before viewing the digital text, students may respond to the following questions in their notebooks: What is a label? What are stereotypes? How are labels and stereotypes connected? After viewing the video, students will respond to the following Guiding Questions: How can labels be harmful and contribute to biases? How can labels be useful? Can we use labels to understand people rather than to judge people? Students will answer these questions in their notebooks first. Then, students will pair with one another to discuss their responses before moving into a full class discussion of 10-15 minutes.

Activity: Exploring Identities by Creating Labels Students will name the ways in which they identify by creating a small poster or label. The teacher will model his/her/their own label, including identities like race, gender, roles (ie-mother), interests, etc. After students create their labels, they will move into a circle holding their labels. Teachers will prompt students to find connections, and students will move around the classroom to have short conversations with those who have similar identities, different identities as prompted by the teacher: Ex. Initiate a conversation with someone with whom you “share a difference” to discuss that difference. Midway through the activity, students will stop to discuss the following: What judgments did you make based on appearances before you read someone’s label? What was not on your labels that could have been? Revise your label if needed. The teacher may decide to continue the “meet and greet” portion of the activity.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead The full class will come together to discuss the following: What made this successful? What part of this activity was not as successful as it could have been? How can we nurture trust and continue to have meaningful conversations? The teacher will record student responses. This will lead to the next session: Establishing Guidelines and Expectations.

Day 2: Identities and Labels Continued & Establishing Guidelines and Expectations Students, together with the teacher, will establish guidelines and expectations for class meetings. In addition, students will brainstorm criteria for a rubric that will be used to determine the class grade for the quarter.

Digital Text: 6th & 7th Grade: The Lie (2:39) This digital text features 4th graders discussing stereotypes that have been placed on them and their feelings about being labeled. 8th Grade: I Am NOT Black, You Are NOT White (4:35) This digital text features a spoken word performance by Prince Ea challenging the use of labels and stereotypes in society. Guiding Questions: Explore the meaning of the title of this course. When did you first realize that race exists? Describe a moment when you realized that race matters? How does this relate to the discussion of labels from last class and the digital text you just watched? Students will

248

answer these questions in their notebooks first. Then, students will pair with one another to discuss their responses before moving into a full class discussion of 10-15 minutes.

Activity 1: Establishing a Class Contract Before starting the activity, students will respond to the following statement in their notebooks as a “private entry” not to be shared: I mostly feel ______when discussing race because ______. How to Tell People They Sound Racist (2:59) (from Facing History, Facing Ourselves) (7th/8th Grade) This video addresses discussing what people “did” or “said” versus what people “are.” Meeting in small groups, students will brainstorm guidelines and expectations for the class on a Google Doc. The guidelines should allow students to openly discuss race in a safe, respectful environment and should also focus on building a sense of trust and community. The class will then come together to discuss and agree upon the guidelines and expectations that will be followed during class meetings and possible consequences for not adhering to expectations. A final contract will be drafted and signed by all members of the class. Teachers may want to use this Facing History resource for creating a contract which guides teachers step by step through the process. The following are some suggestions from this resource that teachers may want to make sure end up in the final contract:

● Listen with respect. Try to understand what someone is saying before rushing to judgment. ● Make comments using “I” statements. ● If you do not feel safe making a comment or asking a question, write the thought in your journal. You can share the idea with your teacher first and together come up with a safe way to share the idea. ● If someone says an idea or question that helps your own learning, say thank you. ● If someone says something that hurts or offends you, do not attack the person. Acknowledge that the comment—not the person—hurt your feelings and explain why. ● Put-downs are never okay. ● If you don’t understand something, ask a question. ● Share the talking time—provide room for others to speak. ● Write thoughts in your journal if you don’t have time to say them during class.

This site also suggests brainstorming scenarios such as the following: ● When we have an idea or question we would like to share, we can... ● When we have an idea but do not feel comfortable sharing it out loud, we can... ● When someone says something that we appreciate, we can... ● When someone says something that might be confusing or offensive, we can... ● To make sure all students have the opportunity to participate in a class discussion, we can... ● If we read or watch something that makes us feel sad or angry, we can... ● To show respect for the ideas of others, we can...

249

Activity 2: Creating a Rubric Once expectations have been established, students will meet in small groups to complete criteria on the blank Google Doc rubric provided. The class will then come together to discuss and agree upon the criteria that must be met to pass the class. This rubric will become the grading tool for the course. 6th grade will aim for three requirements for each criteria of the rubric; 7th grade will aim for four; 8th grade will aim for five.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: Students will self-reflect in their notebooks by responding to the following questions independently: How well did I follow the guidelines during today’s activities? What do I still need to work on? The class will then come together to discuss how well the class followed the guidelines. A copy of the contract and the rubric will be distributed to students once finalized by the teacher. The next class will begin to build vocabulary defining race.

250

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism

Establishing a Class Contract

Essential to this course is making certain that our classroom is a safe space for us to have courageous conversations. Review and discuss the four criteria in the graphic organizer below. Work collaboratively with your peers to brainstorm guidelines and expectations for this course. The guidelines should allow us to openly discuss race in a safe, respectful environment and should also focus on building a sense of trust and community.

Criteria Focus Questions Responses sharing If we are sharing in ways We can respectfully share by listening to everyone’s ideas that are safe and and trying to incorporate them into our own, even if we don’t respectful, what would agree with them. this look like/sound like? Don’t do/say anything based on stereotypes. Think about what you are about to say - be kind and respectful Share the talking time - provide room for others to speak Encourage one another to contribute to the conversation and share ideas Be inclusive to others ideas Only use appropriate language Participate in conversations Raise your hand before you speak Think before you say anything because you never know if you will offend someone with what you are going to say. Engage and contribute to discussions. Put downs are NEVER ok. Try to use politically correct terms. listening If we are listening in Make eye contact with the speaker, leave items at our desks ways that are safe and at rest, and don’t talk when someone is speaking. respectful, what would Actually think about what the person is saying. this look like/sound like? If we listen respectfully no one else is talking and the room is quiet other than the person speaking. Listen with the goal of understanding in mind before rushing to judgment. Looking directly at the speaker and not fooling around with anything in your hand or at your table. Listen and then add on to the conversation. We would not interrupt the person speaking, look at the person speaking. Don't talk to your friends or neighbors. Respect someone's ideas and add on. Give the speaker speaker power. Pay attention to the speaker. Don’t have side conversations.

251

self- If we are reflecting in Be honest with yourself. reflection ways that are safe and Write about your thoughts in your journal as a way of also respectful, what would thinking about challenging ideas. this look like/sound like? Take a moment to yourself to try to know what you could have done better. Evaluate what you have said in the past; cut yourself some slack Think before you type/ speak/ act We can reflect by truly thinking about what you are saying and not just saying what you think people want you to say. Think about how to be an active participant in this course and whether or not you are being one. Only evaluate for yourself Don’t be disrespectful to others. Don’t use excuses for bad behavior

Written- What are the It's neat, not harmful, everything is well and respectfully work expectations for our stated, correct grammar, complete sentences, correct written work? punctuation, appropriate language, correct spelling, use your own point of view, write what you believe. Try your best. Complete all the work that is assigned Respond to guiding/reflection questions as thoroughly and as honestly as we can. If you don’t feel safe making a comment or asking a question, write the thought in your journal to perhaps share later with peers or with your teacher. Always use appropriate language in writing pieces, Written work should be neat and clear with complete sentences. It should demonstrate that the student has listened in class and has engaged in discussions. It should also reflect that the student has checked and rechecked his or her work. If you miss a class, jump back in. Take good care of your journal Don’t rip out pages in your journal or write in messy handwriting.

252

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism

Names: ______

Class Contract

We agree upon the following guidelines and expectations for our course: Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism. We believe these guidelines are essential to building a sense of trust and community in order to openly discuss issues related to race and racism in a safe, respectful environment. We also agree on the consequences for not adhering to the guidelines and expectations established in this contract.

Criteria Guidelines & Expectations

Sharing

Listening

Self-reflection

Written-work

Consequences:

253

Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism

Names: ______

Class Rubric

The following class constructed rubric will be used to assess your participation and work for our course: Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussions about Race and Racism.

Criteria Guidelines & Expectations Score

Sharing

Listening

Self-reflection

Written-work

Excellent - 3 Good - 2 Fair - 1 Unacceptable - 0

Student’s Student’s Student’s Even with extensive participation and participation and participation and teacher interventions work exceeds work meets work is minimal. the student’s expectations expectations Considerable participation and work established for this established for this teacher does not meet the course. course. interventions is expectations required. established for this course.

254

Day 3: What Is Race? Students will begin to acquire the vocabulary needed to discuss issues of race and racism. Terms explored during this lesson: Race and Racism. Note: Today, students will begin a glossary section in their notebooks. Throughout the course, important terms will be recorded in their glossaries, providing students with the language needed to discuss issues of race and racism.

Digital Text/Activity: Race: The Power of an Illusion? (PBS Website - time will vary) Students will explore this PBS website to formulate working definitions of the terms race and racism by examining the following topics: What is Race?; Sorting People; Me, My Race and I. Before engaging with the text, students will answer the following questions in their notebooks: What is race? What is racism? Students will then explore the website in groups of two or three (with only one ChromeBook per group to encourage collaboration) to complete the accompanying note-taking packet guiding them through the following website tabs: What is Race? List three things you’ve learned as a result of navigating this page about race. In your notebooks, formulate a working definition of race based on this list. Sorting People What did you learn through the exercise of “sorting people” in this section of the website? How did sorting people make you feel? Me, My Race and I How does race play a factor in identity? If time allows, students may explore additional website tabs: Race Timeline, Human Diversity, Where Race Lives. Students will then record what they learned from the additional exploration. (Option: Jigsaw this activity using the topics listed above. Student groups will then explore only one tab and share out information collected in the note-taking packet.) After completing the note-taking packet, groups will brainstorm a working definition for race and a working definition for racism on construction paper to be displayed for the class. Students will record agreed upon definitions in their glossaries.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: The class, with the guidance of the teacher, will then review the working definitions and agree upon a common definition for the class in student friendly language. Teachers will base the definition on the Border Crossers’ definitions: Race is a specious system of human classification invented by Europeans who would come to be categorized as White. Shared physical characteristics including skin color, hair texture, and bone structure are used to reinforce the idea of race, but may not provide accurate information regarding racial identity. Racism is a system of social structures that provides or denies access, safety, resources and power based on race categories and produces and reproduces race-based inequities. Racism is different from discrimination or racial prejudice. Racism is race discrimination plus power. Teachers should differentiate between racism and prejudice. If time allows, students will reflect on their original notebook entries and discuss how their initial impressions of race are similar and/or different from their understanding of race after the day’s lesson.

255

Day 4: What Is Race? Continued Students will continue to acquire key vocabulary needed to discuss issues of race and racism. Terms explored during this lesson: Institutional Racism, Interpersonal Racism, Internalized Racism

Digital Text: The Myth of Race, Debunked in 3 Minutes (3:08) or White People: An Explainer (3:44) These digital texts explore how race developed through providing a brief historical perspective and continues to define race and racism. Students will view one of these videos and respond to the following question in their notebooks: How does history inform your understanding of race and racism?

Activity 1: Exploring Where Race Lives After answering this question, students will explore the Where Race Lives (PBS) tab of the Race: The Power of an Illusion? website. 6th grade Graphic Organizer 7th grade Graphic Organizer 8th grade Graphic Organizer Students will complete the graphic organizer to formulate working definitions of institutional racism, interpersonal racism and internalized racism. The students will then be provided with student friendly definitions of these terms based on the following Border Crossers definitions: Institutional Racism is the way racism manifests itself within various institutions in society. This includes the policies and practices that perpetuate a cycle of racial inequity and are promoted (overtly or subtly) by institutions (i.e. schools, government, media). Interpersonal Racism is consciously or subconsciously discriminating against a person or a group simply because of their race. This is usually manifested through communication (verbal or non-verbal) or actions. It occurs when those with racial privilege (typically White people) discriminate against, isolate, minimize the experience of or oppress those with no (historical) structural power (typically People of Color). Interpersonal racism occurs during, but not limited to, interactions that occur within schools, communities and our daily intercommunications. Internalized Racism is an individual’s conscious or subconscious acceptance of racial hierarchy in which White people are consistently ranked above People of Color. It is manifested, but not limited to , exhibiting patterns of thinking that one’s racial group is inferior or / and or thinking aspects of the dominant culture are superior (i.e. assuming Whiteness in the “normal”). The class will then come together to discuss the working definitions of each term and copy the agreed upon definitions into the glossary section of their notebooks. Student-Friendly Definitions: Institutional Racism is a pattern of social institutions — such as governmental organizations, schools, banks, and courts of law — that perpetuate a cycle of racial inequity. Interpersonal Racism is consciously or subconsciously discriminating against a person or group simply because of their race through verbal or nonverbal actions. Internalized Racism is an individual's conscious or subconscious acceptance of racial hierarchy in which White people are consistently ranked above People of Color.

Activity 2: Applying Vocabulary to Essay Students will work in small groups to analyze My Secret Life as an Undocumented Immigrant (Google Doc of My Secret Life as an Undocumented Immigrant) from Elle magazine to identify the different types of racism discussed: Institutional Racism, Interpersonal Racism, Internalized Racism. Students will annotate the essay in their groups, highlighting and explaining examples.

256

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: The class will then come together to share and discuss the identified examples in the essay. After this discussion students will respond to the following questions in their notebooks: What can we do to address institutional, interpersonal and internalized racism?

257

Day 5: Privilege, Supremacy and Becoming an Ally Students will reflect on the idea of privilege in society and in their own lives through a variety of exercises and texts including the work of Peggy McIntosh.

Introduction: The Wastebasket Shot Students will sit in chairs organized into rows. A wastebasket will be placed in the front of the room. Each student will be given a plain sheet of white paper to crumple. Then students will try to throw their papers into the wastebasket from their seats. The students in the front clearly have an advantage to making the shot. After the activity, students will debrief the idea of advantages through a teacher led class discussion of no more than 5-8 minutes. Who had the advantage? Why? Discuss the idea of fairness.

Digital Text: Why Does Privilege Make People So Angry? (4:51) This digital text explores the concept of privilege in different scenarios and explains why people can become defensive when hearing the word “privilege.” Before watching the video students will answer the following question in their notebooks: What privileges do you have? (Students list privileges they have such as: to live in a house, to go to a good school, etc.) Students will then view the digital text.

Activity: Reflecting on Privilege with Peggy McIntosh After viewing, students will engage in the think, pair, share strategy to answer the following questions in their notebooks: Can you think of situations where people have advantages over others who do not? Where have you seen this operating in history? In current events? In your day to day life? Students will then take the Privilege Inventory from the PBS website, Race: The Power of an Illusion? Teachers will then introduce the work of Peggy McIntosh through viewing a brief video. After the presentation, students will revisit their notebooks to reflect on the original list of privileges they brainstormed before watching the video. Students will put checkmarks next to the privileges that they determine they may have (in part) because of their race and add any privileges they think of while reviewing their work. Students will then reflect in their notebooks by responding to the following questions: How did taking this inventory make you feel? Teachers will facilitate a discussion addressing the pitfalls of making generalizations and possible feelings of guilt that may arise.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: Students will then discuss the following questions: What does it mean to be an ally? Teachers will facilitate the discussion to connect to Peggy McIntosh’s work. Teachers may have time to introduce the Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship before the end of class. This framework will be examined in depth during the next session.

258

Day 6: Becoming an Ally Continued Students will brainstorm ways to be an ally, examine the Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship provided, and interact with the Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship by examining examples of allies.

Introduction: The Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship Teachers will distribute and review the framework graphic organizer. Students will discuss the framework to ensure understanding before they begin reviewing materials through the lense of the framework to apply the three main principles of the framework: Consciousness, Education, Action.

Digital Text: 5 Tips for Being an Ally (3:31) This digital text presents 5 tips for being an ally that align with the framework presented: 1) Understand your privilege (consciousness), 2) Listen and do your homework (education), 3) Speak up and move over (action), 4) Realize that you will make mistakes and apologize (consciousness), 5) Ally is a verb (action). Students will view the video and record the tips on the corresponding graphic organizer. The class will come together to review the tips as they correspond to the principles. Students will then copy the definitions of ally and allyship into their glossaries.

Activity: Analyzing an Open Letter for Black Lives Students will read and annotate this Letter for Black Lives to identify examples of the Framework for Anti-Racism Allyship in action. Students will assign each principle of the framework a designated color (ex. Education = E and text underlined in green). They will use this color-code to annotate the text according to the principles of the framework.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: Students will debrief about the day’s work by answering the following questions in their notebooks: How can you be an ally? Share examples of work you have done or that you know of through which people are acting as allies. How do the three principles of the framework work together? Can each principle act alone? Why or why not? The students will then come together to discuss their responses as a full class.

259

Day 7: Immigration - The Struggle for Entrance and Acceptance Students will explore the experiences of immigrants who have traveled to the United States to examine the challenges immigrants face and how these challenges are affected by race.

Introduction: Before reading the texts documenting immigrant experiences, students will respond to the following questions in their notebooks: What are some challenges immigrants face? How do opportunities for immigrants vary based on race? What does it mean when someone is labeled “immigrant” in the United States? The class will then engage in a brief discussion of 5-10 minutes to share responses.

Activity: Exploring Immigrant Experiences Students will then rotate through tables with their small groups to read and respond to the immigrant experiences. Each immigrant experiences will be affixed to a large piece of chart paper. Students will read the experience and write comments on the large paper responding to the following questions: What main idea is the author conveying through this experience? How do you know? How does race play a factor in this person’s experience? These response questions may be written on the chart paper or displayed on the SmartBoard for students to reference. Students will visit each experience for 5-7 minutes before moving to the next experience, reading and responding to as many stories as possible in the allotted time. As students begin to visit experiences with responses, they may not repeat response. Their contributions to the responses must extend an existing response in some way or offer new ideas and/or connections. The full class will then come together to discuss the following questions: What patterns or themes run across the texts you’ve read? How do these readings inform your understanding of immigration?

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: In order to both debrief and look ahead to the following lesson about stereotypes and visibility, students will respond to the following prompt in their journals: Before exploring immigrant stories, what are some stereotypes you had heard about immigrants? How did these stories challenge those stereotypes. Students will watch the Hamilton Mixtape: Immigrants (We Get The Job Done) (6:07) as a culminating full class experience for this lesson.

260

Day 8: Stereotypes and Visibility Students will examine the concept of stereotypes to understand reasons why they exist. Students will also reflect on the concept of visibility by reflecting on media they encounter and how it reflects the representation of racial diversity.

Digital Texts: Six Misconceptions about Native American People (3:04) and the commercial, Proud to Be (Mascots) (2:00) Before viewing these digital texts, students will create a T-chart in their notebooks. On one side, they will write a list of words and phrases that come to mind when they hear the words: Native American, Indigenous Peoples, First Nations, and Indian. Students will they work in partnerships to share their lists and will begin to make observations about the similarities and differences between their ideas. The class will then come together to discuss ideas from the lists including stereotypical symbols of Native Americans (ie. teepees, feathers, buffalo). Students will then view the digital texts. After viewing the texts, students will complete the right side of T-chart by addressing the same question. Students work within their partnerships to share their new ideas and make observations about how the two lists in the T-chart differ. In their notebooks, students will respond to the following guiding questions: What is a stereotype? Observe how the two sides of the T-chart are different. Why are they different? Which items on the T-chart are stereotypes? Why do stereotypes exist? The teacher will lead a discussion illuminating the reasons for the existence of stereotypes: -Oversaturation of select images to represent certain groups of people -Lack of visibility in media -Lack of learning about other groups and cultures Students will then add the definition of stereotype to their glossaries: A stereotype is a widely held but fixed and oversimplified idea of a particularly type of person or thing.

Activity: Examining Racial Diversity in Media Students will independently complete the Visibility in the Media graphic organizer. After completing the organizer, students will meet in small groups to share their findings, focusing on the conclusions drawn in response to the question: How is race represented in the media? The full class will then discuss how these findings relate to the earlier discussion about stereotypes.

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: Student will respond to the following question in their notebooks: How did today’s activities inform your understanding of stereotypes? If time allows, the class will discuss this. The next day’s topic will be colorblindness.

261

Day 9: Colorblindness Students will discuss and define what they believe the term colorblindness means.

Introduction: Ask students to discuss the following questions: What does it mean to be colorblind when relating to human beings? Is this approach helpful or harmful?

Digital Text: MTV Decoded: Why Colorblindness Won’t End Racism (5:36) This text discusses the myth of colorblindess as a way to “fix” racism. Students will view the video and then unpack the information provided. In small groups students should discuss the following: Why won’t colorblindness end racism? And evaluate the statement: “I don’t see color.” In what ways is this statement, in fact, racist?

Activity: The Truth About Colorblindness Write each of the statements below about colorblindness on its own a large sheet of paper. Teaching support/tips are provided inside of the parentheses for the facilitator of this lesson. If possible, organize students into 6 different groups. Each group will begin at a station with one of the sheets of paper. Ask students to read the statement, discuss what it means, and respond in writing on the sheet of paper. Give students about 5 minutes to read, discuss, and respond. Then, ask them to rotate to the next station to repeat this process.

Colorblindness is disingenuous (Display images of two similarly aged celebrities and ask: Do you notice any differences?) Colorblindness invalidates people’s identities (Race is intimately tied to people’s identities and signifies culture, gender, religion, tradition, language, and heritage – genuine sources of pride. If we don’t “see color” we don’t see or dismiss important aspects of a person’s identity) Colorblindness invalidates racist experiences (If we insist that we don’t “see color” then we can’t “see” racism - it simply doesn’t exist and therefore the process of addressing racism is derailed before it ever starts) Colorblindness equates color with something negative (The comment “I don’t see color; I just see people” carries with it one huge implication: It implies that color is a problem, arguably synonymous with “I can see who you are despite your race.”) Colorblindness narrows White people’s understanding of the world and leads to disconnection (Understanding any situation requires multiple perspectives) Colorblindness hinders tracking of racial disparities (Discuss examples from the digital text such as school discipline, jobs, housing, etc.);

Debriefing and Looking Ahead: Students will debrief about the day’s work by answering the following questions in their notebooks: If statements such as “I don’t see color” and “It’s better to be colorblind” aren’t helpful and in fact harmful, why do people say them? What do they really mean when they say them? What should we say instead?

262

Day 10: Symbols of Hate and Racism

The following lesson is adapted from the Anti-Defamation League website. We see symbols every day in all aspects of our lives. Symbols are used to convey ideas, qualities, emotions, objects, products, opinions, and beliefs. Unfortunately, symbols are also used to convey hatred and bias.

Introduction: Students will respond to two questions in their notebook: What are symbols? What is the purpose of a symbol? The students will turn and talk to a neighbor; then we will engage in a 5-10 minute discussion sharing ideas.

Activity: Sorting Symbols Students will be provided with representations of symbols in their table groups. They will be asked to organize the symbols into three categories: neutral, positive, negative. Once students make their selections, they will rotate around the classroom to observe how other groups sorted the symbols. The students will then engage in a group discussion around two focus questions: What questions or thoughts do you have about the symbols used in the sort? What observations did you make during your visual walk? The discussion will be followed by a digital text.

Digital Text: Native American’s Review Sports Mascots (2:45) After viewing the digital text, students will be asked to review their choices. Students can choose to move symbols into different columns. Groups will be asked to share and explain their choices. Then as a large group students will share their responses to the following questions: Why might a word or symbol be offensive or hateful to one person, but not to another? Who gets to decide if a symbol is offensive? What gives symbols their meaning? Teachers will ensure that the role of power is part of the discussion.

Activity: Symbols of Hate In small groups students will be assigned a specific hate symbol: swastika, burning cross, Confederate flag, noose, SS bolts, Celtic cross. Groups will be provided with a graphic organizer and a background information worksheet to read and answer the following questions: What is the symbol? What is its origin? How does it communicate hate? Utilizing the jigsaw approach, students will share what they have learned with their peers.

Debrief and Looking Ahead: Notebook Reflection - Think about how we as individuals and as a community can confront symbols of hate. Which resources are available to help you confront symbols of hate?

Racial Justice Projects: Looking through the Lens of Race After moving through the curriculum for days 1-10, students will be prepared to apply and synthesize what they have learned through engaging in group projects. These group projects will span 6-9 Days. Students will research and read to collect information, create a project from from a menu of options synthesizing the information, and present their projects to share the information gleaned and the conclusions they have drawn.

263

Essential Question: How does race play a role in what is happening in the news? Project Topics by Grade Level: 6th Grade: Representation of Race in Literature, Media (Oscars So White; Diversity in Children’s Literature: stereotypes and single stories; Who gets to tell a story?; Historical perspectives: told by winners 7th Grade: Environmental Racism (The Ninth Ward - Hurricane Katrina; Flint Michigan Water Crisis; The South Dakota Pipeline Conflict) 8th Grade: General Current Events (Immigration, Racial Profiling, Police Brutality, Confederate Monuments, etc.)

Reflections of Self- Awareness of Race: Writing Our Narratives Students will revisit the questions: When did I first become aware of race? When did I first realize race matters? Students will read and reflect on several model narratives. Then students will compose their own reflections in response to the above questions. This smaller project will span 2-3 days.

Culminating Activities In order to demonstrate their learning and bring the class to closure, students will engage in a variety of culminating activities. These culminating activities will span 2-3 days.

I mostly feel ______about discussing race because ______.

Glossary:

Stereotype: an exaggerated belief, image or distorted truth about a group or person—a generalization that allows for little or no individual differences or social variation. Stereotypes are based on images in mass media or reputations passed on by parents, peers and other members of society. Stereotypes can be positive or negative but are always harmful. (Teaching Tolerance)

264

Appendix D

Individual Interview Protocol #1

How are you? Thank you for taking time to talk to me. Do I have your permission to make an audio recording of this interview?

Today I’m going to ask introductory questions about your background to learn more about you. Then, I’m going to ask questions about your overall experiences of being a teacher. Finally, I’m going to ask questions about race and what aracial-justice curriculum means to you.

If there’s a question that you are not comfortable with or ready to answer, we can skip that question altogether or come back to it later.

Later, I will be listening and transcribing this interview to use for my dissertation study. Is it ok if I follow-up with you later, by email or phone, to clarify information if needed?

Ok, can you say your name for the recording?

1. Tell me about where you grew up. 2. Tell me about where you live now. In what ways is this different or similar to where you grew up? 3. How would you describe your K-12 schooling? a. Did you like or dislike school? Why? b. In what ways did your teachers influence you? c. Describe your peers? How are students today similar or different from your K-12 peers? d. What impressions did you have on the curriculum? e. Looking back, what do you believe your teachers and administrators believed to be the purpose of school? Did you agree with this then? Do you agree with this know? 4. What made you decide to be a teacher? 5. Tell me about your school district. a. Describe the students in this district. b. Describe your colleagues in this district. c. Describe the administrators in this district. 6. Could you describe the main things that happen during the school year, beginning in September and going through June? 7. Could you describe a typical day at work for you? 8. What do you like about teaching? 9. Could you describe a circumstance when you felt good about your teaching or being a teacher? 10. What is most challenging or difficult about teaching?

265

11. Could you describe a circumstance when you felt dissatisfied about your teaching or being a teacher. 12. How do you think your identities might influence your teaching? Can you give an example of an experience where one or more of your identities influenced your teaching? 13. How has race been discussed in this school prior to these courses? 14. People apply many different meaning to the phrase “racial-justice.” What does this mean to you? What is a “racial-justice curriculum”? 15. Can you tell me about why you feel racial-justice curriculum is needed in schools?

266

Appendix E

Individual Interview Protocol #2

How are you? Thank you for taking time to talk to me again. Do I have your permission to make an audio recording of this interview?

Today I’m going to ask you several questions about the experiences of writing racial- justice curriculum and then teaching it. First, I’m going to ask questions about your experiences developing racial-justice curriculum with your colleagues. Then, I’m going to ask questions about teaching the curriculum in your Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism courses in the middle-school. Finally, I’m going to ask questions about your overall perceptions of the curriculum and course.

If there’s a question that you are not comfortable with or ready to answer, we can skip that question altogether or come back to it later.

Later, I will be listening and transcribing this interview to use for my dissertation study. Is it ok if I follow-up with you later, by email or phone, to clarify information if needed?

Ok, can you say your name for the recording?

1. Could you describe the process you used to develop racial-justice curriculum? a. What were you hoping to accomplish? b. What kinds of curricular materials/information did you include? c. What did you discover during the process of designing the curriculum? d. How did you determine what to include in the curriculum and what to leave out? Can you describe an example of this? e. How do you think your participation in the process affected the resulting curriculum? 2. Tell me about what the overall experience of developing racial-justice curriculum was like for you? a. If you could draw an image that represents this experience, what would it be? Could you sketch this? 3. Tell me about how you taught the curriculum you developed? 4. Tell me about the students in your class? a. What decisions have you made about designing the overall curriculum and teaching the curriculum based on the knowledge you have about your students? 5. If you could only choose 3 words to describe the experience of teaching this curriculum with your students, what would they be? 6. Let’s look at the 80-minutes of the course in ten minute increments. Can you tell me what’s happening in each of these increments?

267

7. What effect does this curriculum seem to be having on students? a. Can you describe an example of a student or students reacting positively to a particular part of the curriculum? Why do you think this student (or students) reacted this way? b. Can you describe an example of a student or students reacting negatively to a particular part of the curriculum? Why do you think this student (or students) reacted this way? c. In what ways do you determine the effectiveness of the curriculum? 8. What is most challenging about enacting this curriculum? What strategies do you use to deal with these challenges? 9. Can you describe any type of support you’ve felt you’ve needed? In what ways did you or didn’t you received this support? 10. Can you describe your overall experience teaching this curriculum? a. Tell me about content you feel has been most effective? b. What revisions have you made to the curriculum and why? 11. What do you believe is the background, experiences, or knowledge do teachers need to design and enact racial-justice curriculum? What leads you to believe this? 12. What conditions are needed in schools for racial-justice curriculum to exist? 13. Can you describe what it would look like for issues related to race and racism to be addressed throughout the school district? 14. What difference does this curriculum seem to make in the lives of your students? 15. What difference does this curriculum seem to make in your life?

Thank you for speaking with me. Is there anything else you’d like to share?

268

Appendix F

Focus Group Protocol #1

How are you? Thank you all for taking time to talk to me. Do I have your permission to make an audio recording of this interview?

Today I’m going to ask you several questions about the experiences of writing racial- justice curriculum and then teaching it. I’d like to ask questions that will help us to think about our experiences developing the curriculum. I will be participating in our conversation as well as facilitating it.

If there’s a question that you are not comfortable or ready to answer you we can skip that question altogether or come back to it later.

Later, I will be listening and transcribing this interview to use for my dissertation study. Is it ok if I follow-up with you later, by email or phone, to clarify information if needed?

Ok, can you each say your names for the recording?

1. If we could just go back and revisit our thinking, let’s talk about how we got here. a. What made us feel we needed a racial-justice curriculum in our school? What did we mean by a “racial-justice curriculum?” b. What made us feel we could develop this curriculum? c. Why did we propose the Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism courses for 6th, 7th, and 8th graders? d. Why did we suggest to administration that we’d teach the courses? 2. What did you like best about developing racial-justice curriculum? 3. Could you each create an image that you feel represents the process of developing this Curriculum? a. Can you tell us about the image you created? b. How do you think our images compare? How do you think they differ? 4. If you could use two words to describe the experience of developing the curriculum, what would they be? 5. What was most challenging about developing the curriculum? 4. What are the pros and cons of teachers working collaboratively to develop racial- justice curriculum? 5. What did you think about the curriculum you developed once you taught it in your courses? 6. Can you tell us about the artifact you brought today and why you’ve chosen to bring this? a. Why did you choose this artifact? b. What does it represent to you?

269

c. How does it support or challenge your decision-making in the development of the curriculum? 7. Can you look at your teacher journal and share your field notes about a moment that occurred during the developing of this curriculum that was surprising to you? Can you share your field notes about a moment that was puzzling to you? 8. Can you rank the following issues raised in the racial-justice curriculum in order of most important to you: defining race, colorblindness, defining racism, supremacy, privilege, being an ally?

Thank you for speaking me with me. Is there anything else you’d like to say?

270

Appendix G

Focus Group Protocol #2

How are you? Thank you all for taking time to talk to me again. Do I have your permission to make an audio recording of this interview?

Today I’m going to ask you several questions about the experiences of teaching the racial-justice curriculum in the Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism course. I anticipate that we may also revisit and address experiences developing the curriculum. Finally, I’d like to ask questions about your overall experiences with the curriculum and the course. I will be participating in our conversation as well as facilitating it.

If there’s a question that you are not comfortable or ready to answer you we can skip that question altogether or come back to it later.

Later, I will be listening and transcribing this interview to use for my dissertation study. Is it ok if I follow-up with you later, by email or phone, to clarify information if needed?

Ok, can you each say your names for the recording?

1. Can you describe what a typical day looks like in your course? a. Could you create an image that represents this? 2. Looking at the copies of the curriculum, can you locate and discuss a lesson that worked well with your students and describe the experience? 3. Can you locate a particular lesson that was problematic and discuss this experience? 4. How do you think your students experienced these courses? a. What were their reactions? b. In what ways did you assess their comfort with the curriculum? c. In what ways did you assess their understanding of the curriculum? 5. When I spoke with each of you individually, you ranked and ordered the lessons you felt were most important and the order you believed they should be taught with your students. Can you discuss your thinking with each other about that? 6. Can you tell me about the artifact you brought with you today? a. What does this artifact represent? b. In what ways does it support or demonstrate a challenge during instruction? 7. In what ways might teachers’ identities influence the development and teaching of racial-justice curriculum? 8. In what ways might the identities of students influence the development and teaching of racial-justice curriculum? 9. Can you describe any revisions you made to the curriculum and/or your teaching?

271

a. Why was this revision necessary? b. Did it work? c. How do you know if the revision was effective? 10. If you could use two words to describe your experiences teaching this curriculum, which words would you choose? 11. Can you tell me about the feelings you experienced when teaching this course? What were some of the issues or events in the classroom that caused these feelings? 12. Can you describe a challenge you experienced during the courses and how you managed this challenge? 13. What recommendations would you make for teachers who want to engage racial- justice curriculum in their classrooms? a. In what ways did and/or can administrators support this work? b. In what ways did and/or can parents support this work? c. Where are the best places for teachers to go to for resources that help them to teach about race?

Thank you for speaking me with me. Is there anything else you’d like to say about your experiences developing and instructing racial-justice curriculum?

272

Appendix H

Sample Field Notes

April 20, 2018 4: 45 p.m. Erin’s house Discussing student response to Ways they known students are invested? curriculum and course. Ways they assess? Reid and Jamie –enthusiastic, several Is Erin embarrassed? “yes” remarks Erin – seems puzzled; tightens lips, shaking head no, seems to disagree

273

Appendix I

Demographics Survey

Sample Questions for Demographics Survey

Thank you for participating in the study. I am interested in learning more about your background as I explore you’re the experiences you’ve described in interviews about developing racial-justice curriculum for middle-school students, as well as your experiences teaching this curriculum in the Sparking Courageous Conversations: Discussing Race and Racism course.

Please complete this survey. It should take 10-15 minutes to complete. Then, email your completed survey to me at [email protected]. The information from this survey will be kept confidential. Some of the questions below are sensitive. You have the option to refuse to answer any question(s) that you are not comfortable answering. Please circle “prefer not to answer” if this circumstance arises.

Name: ______

1. Please state your age. ______Prefer not to answer

2. Please specify your ethnicity origin (or Race): Prefer not to answer

□ Asian/Pacific Islander □ Black of African American □ Hispanic of Latino □ Native American or American Indian □ White □ Other ______

3. What is the highest degree or level of school you have completed? If currently enrolled, highest degree received. Prefer not to answer

□ High school graduate, diploma or the equivalent (for example: GED) □ Some college credit, no degree □ Trade/technical/vocational training □ Associate degree □ Bachelor’s degree □ Master’s degree □ Professional degree □ Doctorate degree

274

4. What is your marital status? Prefer not to answer

□ Single, never married □ Married or domestic partnership □ Widowed □ Divorced □ Separated

5. Do you have children? Prefer not to answer

Yes No

If yes what are their ages? ______

6. Do you have a religious affiliation? Prefer not to answer

Yes No

If yes, please describe. ______

7. How many years have you been a teacher? Prefer not to answer

______

8. How many years have you taught in your current school district? Prefer not to answer

______

275

Appendix J

Sparks

RMC Spark October 2016

Sparks are brief informational starters designed to “spark” conversations that are central to students learning about and discussing current issues of race and racism that extend beyond historical contexts. For additional information about the RMC and the purpose of these Sparks, please reference: Introduction.

Topic and Text How Do Students Experience Race in the Classroom? Being 12: Kids on Race (4:17) Middle school students share their experiences and the assumptions they feel others have of them based on race.

Facilitating this Text Participants listen respectfully to the experiences shared by the students in the video and then discuss the following questions: What are you hearing about the experiences of some students in the video as they navigate life in and out of school? How do you see this reflected in our school community? How does discussing race make you feel?

Extension Resources and Activities Participants explore the following prompt: Describe the first time you became aware of race. Do White People Get Stressed Talking about Race?(4:57) Possible HS Resource: Kids on Race: The Hidden Picture (6:25) Possible Elementary Resource: Children Talk about Race in America (4:28)

Thoughts? Please visit the RMC blog for resources and to engage in discussions, ask questions, and provide feedback about this Spark.

Sparking Forward Drop the “I” Word: No Human Being is Illegal